Court No. - 75
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 42736 of 2019 Applicant :- Anekpal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Sharma,Prashant Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant for quashing of the summoning order dated 17.07.2018 as well as the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No.1085 of 2018 (Vikash Kumar Vs. Anekpal), under Section 138 of N.I. Act, P.S. Amroha Dehat, District Amroha, pending in the Court of Additional Civil Judge (S.D.) A.C.J.M., Amroha.
As per the allegations made in the complaint, it is alleged that the applicant has issued a Cheque No.675100 amounting to Rs.9,00,000/- dated 10.05.2018 to Opposite Party No.2., however, on presentation of the said cheque before the Bank for payment the same was dishonoured. After the dishonour of the cheque, a notice was sent to the applicant to make good the payment however, despite being noticed the due amount was not paid as such, the present complaint has been filed.
On the basis of the said complaint, learned Magistrate has recorded the statements of the witnesses and after making the requisite enquiry under Sections 200 and 202 CrPC passed the summoning order against the applicant to face trial under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act vide order dated 17.07.2018.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that no notice was served upon him and also no due debt or liability exists and therefore, the proceedings under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act cannot be drawn against him.
Per contra; learned A.G.A. has supported the impugned order and submitted that learned Magistrate after taking into consideration the allegations made in the complaint and the statements recorded under Sections 200 and 202 CrPC has passed the summoning order against the applicant to face trial under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act. The disputed question of fact whether the notice has been served and the existence of any due debt or liability cannot be determined at this stage when the evidence is yet to come. Therefore, the impugned order passed by the court below does not suffer from any illegality or infirmity and do not call for any interference.
Having considered the rival submissions made by the counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the impugned order has been passed by the learned Magistrate on the basis of allegations made in the complaint and after making the requisite enquiry under Sections 200 and 202 CrPC and the disputed question of fact whether the notice has been served and that of the existence of any due debt or liability cannot be determined at this stage when the evidence is yet to come. As such impugned order passed by the learned Magistrate is just, proper and legal and do not call for any interference.
The present application under Section 482 is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 28.11.2019 Zafar