Zubair Masoodi vs Adam Zahoor

Rajnesh Oswal, J

1) The petitioner has filed the present petition for quashing the complaint tilted ‘Adam Zahoor vs. Zubair Ahmad Masoodi’ under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, pending before the Court of Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class (Sub-Registrar), Srinagar (for short ‘the trial court’ and also the order by virtue of which the process has been issued against the petitioner.

2) It is stated that the learned trial court has issued the process despite the fact that the original cheque was not filed with the complaint before the issuance of notice by the trial court and it was only on 1st November, 2013, the trial court permitted the respondent to place on record the original cheque and the memo on the request of the respondent and the cheque as well as the memo in original were placed on record before the trial court on 18.02.2014.

3) From the record, this Court finds that earlier also, the petitioner had filed a petition bearing 561-A No.163/2015 and the prayer of the petitioner to quash the complaint as well as the order of issuance of process was rejected by this Court vide order dated 14th March, 2017. The petitioner in fact wants to reopen the issue again through the medium of this petition, which is not permissible in view of dismissal of the petition filed by the petitioner for the same relief.

4) The only issue that is required to be addressed is whether the photocopies of the cheque as well as the memo could not have been relied upon by the learned trial court while issuing the process against the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that photocopy of the cheque is not admissible in evidence.

5) The learned trial court has already permitted the respondent to place on record the cheque vide order dated 18th February, 2014. Since the original cheque and memo have been brought on record, this court does not find any reason to show indulgence at this stage, more particularly when the issue relates to admissibility of the document. Whether the document is admissible as evidence or not. is to be examined during the trial of the complaint.

6) It is only when there is either abuse of process of law or in the interests of justice, that the Court can show indulgence under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. This Court does not find that there is any abuse of process of law or interference of the Court is warranted in the interests of justice. This petition is found to be without any merit and the same is dismissed. Interim direction, if any shall cease to be in operation.

7) A copy of this order be sent to the learned trial court for information.