IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND SEPTEMBER 2010 / 31ST BHADRA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 3467 of 2010() ------------------------------------- ST. NO.278/2009 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, PATHANAMTHITTA. ............. PETITIONER/ACCUSED ---------------------------------- N.N. SASI, NELLIMALAVALLIYIL HOUSE, CHIRAYIRAMBU.P.O., MARAMON, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.R.SANTHOSH BABU RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT --------------------------------------------- 1. KAMALASANAN. P.K., S/O.KRISHNAN, PANACHACKAL HOUSE, KAREMVELI MURI, MALLAPPUZHASSERY VILLAGE, KOZHENCHERRY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA-689 646.. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.P.A. SALIM. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J. -------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.3467 of 2010 -------------------------- ORDER Petitioner, the accused in S.T.No.278/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Pathanamthitta, taken cognizance for the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act on Annexure- A15 complaint filed by the first respondent, filed this petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings contending that complaint is manifestly malafide and unsustainable and therefore, it is to be quashed. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner was heard. 3. Argument of the learned counsel is that Annexure-A7 notice sent by the first respondent on 17.3.2008 establishes that the relationship of the first respondent with the petitioner got strained even in March 2008 and in such circumstances, the CRMC 3467/10 2 case in Annexure-A15 complaint that petitioner issued a cheque to the first respondent on 10.8.2008 is improbable and can only be rejected. This Court, under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, cannot decide disputed question of facts, as it requires evidence. If the averments in Annexure-A15 complaint is to be taken as correct, an offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act is attracted. The question whether the dishonoured cheque was extracted using threat or coercion, as claimed by the petitioner, is a matter for evidence. Granting liberty to the petitioner to raise all the contentions raised herein before the learned Magistrate, this petition is disposed. 22nd September, 2010 (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge) tkv