GUWAHATI, India, May 1 -- Gauhati High Court issued the following order on March 31:

Heard Mr. P. Prawar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. D.P. Goswami, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam. 2. This is an application under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for quashing the proceedings of N.I.R. Case No.38/2022 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 pending in the court of the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Darrang, Mangaldai. 3. On 11.11.2022, the petitioner issued a cheque of Rs. 15,82,345/- to the respondent. The cheque was dishonoured by the bank on 15.11.2022. After compliance of the formalities, the respondent filed the case under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that the respondent issued a notice to the petitioner asking him to pay the money within 7(seven) days of receiving the notice. According to Mr. Prawar, this notice is illegal because instead of 7 days time, 15 days time should have been given. 5. Apart from this plea, the petitioner has also raised some other issues, which do not deserve an elaborate discussion in this case. 6. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel of both sides. 7. The guidelines for consideration of a petition under Section 482 of the CrPC has been laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, AIR 1992 SC 604. Paragraph 102 of the judgment reads as under:

"102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised.

(1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused.

(2) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=I1mmm2bl4r4EREhYK63Kv3JHEJjEqRpds2PCdjoWM50poq47wrYqqGfUPmQaUfaX&caseno=Crl.Pet./465/2026&cCode=1&cino=GAHC010063682026&state_code=6&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.