In Brief
A woman challenged a criminal prosecution for cheque dishonour under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The respondent-complainant had issued a statutory notice but later filed a criminal complaint without disclosing that the accused had demanded loan documents and written letters requesting the complainant to provide the documents relied upon in that notice. The Supreme Court held that the suppression of these material letters in the complaint and the complainant's statement on oath amounted to an abuse of process. The Court quashed the complaint, emphasizing that a complainant cannot set criminal law in motion while suppressing material facts, and that the accused must be given opportunity to review documents before responding to a statutory notice.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.