Court No. - 64
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 21620 of 2019 Applicant :- Harsh Vardhan Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Durga Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.
Sri Alok Kumar Srivastava has filed his power on behalf of respondent no.2, the same is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Alok Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for respondent no.2, learned AGA for the State and perused the application.
This application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to quash the summoning order dated 06.04.2017 passed by Presiding Officer, Additional Court (N.I. Act), Allahabad in Complaint Case No.2132 of 2015, under Section 138 of N.I. Act, P.S. George Town, District Allahabad along with non- bailable warrant issued against the applicant dated 29.01.2018 and 24.4.2019 and the consequent proceedings under Section 82/83 Cr.P.C.
Grievance is that in this case the summoning order was passed ignoring the fact that applicant is residing at Lucknow and is not residing at Allahabad and there was no point for knowledge of the pendency of the case coming in the mind of the applicant. As soon as order under Section 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. was passed the applicant came to know about the pendency of this case and then he obtained certain papers after inquiring and rush to this Court. The proceeding initiated is not maintainable as such because the cheques in question have been stolen from the house of the applicant and opposite party no.2 is the share holder of the company jointly owned by the applicant and opposite party no.2 and in such a situation, opposite party no.2 has misused his position and the cheques ment to be utilized for the transaction of the company have been misappropriated to the utter dismay of the present applicant, which cannot be allowed to go on and the court below ignorant of these facts had issued the summoning order dated 6.4.2017 and the consequential non-bailable warrant and the consequential order passed under Section 82 and 83 Cr.P.C.
Learned counsel for respondent no.2 has submitted that the cheques were meant to be utilized towards the transaction and the same bounced. There is no point in misappropriating any cheques, as such, whatever the factual defence the applicant has, he can make it before the court below and the court below itself is competent enough to pass appropriate order.
Also heard the learned A.G.A.
Considered the submission so raised and also the entirety of the case, at this stage, mere summoning has been done and because of the absence of the applicant, non- bailable warrant has been issued and the consequential order under Section 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. passed. It is expected that the applicant may appear before the court below and he may give an undertaking that he shall participate in the proceeding and shall remain present and in case, any such undertaking is given within two weeks' from today then his case may be sympathetically considered and he may be allowed to participate in the proceeding and the applicant shall be free to agitate his claim before the court below.
Accordingly, this application is finally disposed off.
However, observation so made shall not touch the merit of the case.
Order Date :- 30.5.2019 Raj