R. Narayana Pisharadi ORDER
R. Narayana Pisharadi, J.
1. The petitioner is the accused in the case S.T. No. 1836/2017 on the file of the Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Mattannur.
2. The aforesaid case is one instituted upon the complaint (Annexure-A) filed against the petitioner by the first respondent (hereinafter referred to as 'the complainant') for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').
3. The material averments in Annexure-A complaint are as follows : The complainant is a company conducting chitty business. Mr. M.L. George was the subscriber of four chitties conducted by the complainant company. Mr. George had bid the chitties for Rs. 18,75,000/- each and the amount was paid to him. Thereafter, he failed to repay the balance chitty amount of Rs. 45,27,242/- to the complainant company. The accused was the surety of Mr. George in the chitty transactions. She agreed to repay the amount and issued a cheque dated 20.04.2017 for Rs. 45,27,242/- to the complainant in discharge of the liability. The complainant presented the cheque in the bank. It was returned unpaid on 09.05.2017, for the reason that there was no sufficient amount in the account of the accused. On 27.05.2017, the complainant sent a lawyer notice to the accused demanding payment of the amount of the cheque. The accused received the notice on 29.05.2017. She did not send any reply. She did not pay the amount of the cheque.
4. This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is filed by the accused for quashing the proceedings initiated against her on the basis of Annexure-A complaint, on the ground that the complainant has initiated arbitration proceedings against her and Mr. George.
5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the first respondent/complainant.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, subsequent to the institution of Annexure-A complainant against the petitioner, the complainant has initiated arbitration proceedings for realisation of the amount allegedly due from the subscriber of the chitty and also the petitioner in the chitty transactions. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that, the questions whether the petitioner owes any amount to the complainant company and if so, what is the amount owed by her, could be decided only after the disposal of the arbitration cases.
7. Annexure-A complaint contains necessary averments to attract an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act. There is no merit in the contention of the petitioner that the averments in Annexure-A complaint do not constitute the ingredients of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act.
8. There is also no merit in the contention of the petitio........