IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS.1382-1383 OF 2019
(Arising out of SLP(Crl.) Nos. 1365-1366/2019 )
M/S WOMB LABORATORIES PVT LTD …APPELLANT(S)
VIJAY AHUJA & ANR. …RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
- Leave granted.
- These appeals take exception to the
Judgment and Order dated 23 rd
July, 2018 passed by
the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Crl.M.C.
Nos. 3084/2015 and 3086/2015 whereby the proceedings
initiated against respondent No.1 for the offence
punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act, 1881 came to be quashed.
- The High Court mainly referred to the
assertion in the complaint that the security
cheques were demanded in response to which the
accused had issued three signed blank cheques and
stated if the amount is not returned within two
years then by presenting the cheques the same may
be encashed . This assertion was assumed by the High
Court to mean that the cheques were given only by
way of security. Having said that, the High Court
proceeded to hold that the �security� offered was
not for the discharge of any debt or any liability.
Resultantly, it came to hold that the action under
Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881
cannot proceed against the accused any further.
- We have heard counsel for the parties.
- In our opinion, the High Court has muddled
the entire issue. The averment in the complaint does
indicate that the signed cheques were handed over by
the accused to the complainant. The cheques were
given by way of security, is a matter of defence.
Further, it was not for the discharge of any debt or
any liability is also a matter of defence. The
relevant facts to countenance the defence will have
to be proved – that such security could not be
treated as debt or other liability of the accused.
That would be a triable issue. We say so because,
handing over of the cheques by way of security per
se would not extricate the accused from the
discharge of liability arising from such cheques.
- Suffice it to observe, the impugned
judgment of the High Court cannot stand the test of
judicial scrutiny . The same is, therefore, set
- As respondent No.1 has raised other
contention(s) in the quashing petition, we deem it
appropriate to relegate the parties before the High
Court for examining those grounds on its own merits
in accordance with law.
- Counsel for the appellant pointed out that
in view of the changed legal position, the complaint
must now proceed before the Court at Ahmedabad. Even
this contention may be pursued before the High Court
in the remanded proceedings, which may be dealt with
- The appeals are disposed of in the above
SEPTEMBER 11, 2019
ITEM NO.31 COURT NO.7 SECTION II-C
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).1365-1366/2019
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 23-07-2018
in CRLMC No. 3084/2015 and CRLMC No. 3086/2015 passed by the High
Court Of Delhi At New Delhi)
M/S WOMB LABORATORIES PVT LTD Petitioner(s)
VIJAY AHUJA & ANR. Respondent(s)
IA No. 6355/2019 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED
Date : 11-09-2019 These matters were called on for hearing today.
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Siddharth Batra, AOR
Mr. Ravinder Kumar, Adv.
Ms. Garima Sehgal, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Sanjeev Agarwal, AOR
Mr. Ekansh Agarwal, Adv.
Mr. Chirag M. Shroff, AOR
Ms. Mahima C. Shroff, Adv.
Ms. Yashika Verma, Adv
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R
The appeals are disposed of in terms of the
In view of the above, pending application(s)
shall stand disposed of.
COURT MASTER (VIDYA NEGI)
(Signed order is placed on the file.)