Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2018
  6. /
  7. January

Harish Pal Babbar vs State Of U P And Anr

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|06 September, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 44
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28664 of 2018 Applicant :- Harish Pal Babbar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Anshul Kumar Singhal,Vinod Kumar Agarwal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
1. Heard Mr. Vinod Kumar Agarwal, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging the entire proceedings of the Complaint Case No. 3692 of 2017 (Amit Singhal vs. Harish Pal Babbar), under Section 138 N.I.Act, Police Station Kavi Nagar, District Ghaziabad pending in the court of IInd Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Ghaziabad.
3. From the record, it appears that a cheque dated 16th July, 2014 valued at Rs. 10,02,500/- drawn on Punjab National Bank, KDB School, Kavig Nagar Branch, Ghaziabad was issued by the applicant in favour of the opposite party no.2. The said cheque was presented on 16th July, 2014 by the opposite party no.2 in his bank. However, the same was returned unencashed vide memo of return dated 28th July, 2014. Consequently, as per the mandate of Section 138 (b) N.I. Act, the opposite party no.2 sent a legal notice dated 26th August, 2014 to the applicant asking him to pay the amount payable under the disputed cheque. But, inspite of the aforesaid, the amount payable under the aforesaid disputed cheque was not paid by the applicant. Consequently, the opposite party no.2 filed the complaint dated 8th October, 2014 in terms of Section 138 N.I.Act.
4. On the basis of the material on the record and the allegations made in the complaint, the court concerned summoned the present applicant by means of the summoning order dated 13th August, 2015.
5. Subsequent to the aforesaid summoning order dated 13th August, 2015, the applicant failed to appear before the court below and consequently, bailable warrant was issued against the applicant vide order dated 16th November, 2015. Time and again, bailable warrants were issued, yet the applicant failed to appear before the court below. At last, the applicant appeared before the court below on 12th July, 2017 and was admitted to bail. The applicant continued to participate in the proceedings of the above mentioned complaint case but absented himself from the proceedings on 25th May, 2018. As the accused was absent, the court below issued Non-Bailable Warrant against the applicant. The Non-Bailable Warrant so issued against the applicant has been operating since 25th May, 2018 i.e. for the more than three months.
6. Why the applicant absented himself from the proceedings of the above mentioned complaint case pending before the court below or why the applicant could not appear before the court below and seek recall of the warrant so issued against him in terms of Section 70 (2) Cr.P.C. has also not been explained in the affidavit filed is support of the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C.. The complaint case filed by the opposite party no.2 has been pending since 8th October, 2014 i.e. for almost four years.
7. However, considering the facts that the applicant has approached the court within a reasonable period and is ready to participate in the proceedings of the above mentioned complaint case, this Court is taking a sympathetic view.
8. Accordingly, it is directed that the execution of the Non- Bailable Warrant issued against the applicant shall be kept in abeyance till 10th October, 2018. The applicant shall appear before the court below on or before the aforesaid date. In case the aforesaid direction is complied with, the court below shall re-admit the applicant to bail.
9. However, in case default on the part of the applicant to comply with the aforesaid direction, the interim protection granted to the applicant as well as the direction to the court below to re-admit the applicant to bail, both shall stand automatically revoked. Thereafter the court below shall be free to proceed against the applicant in accordance with law.
10. With the aforesaid directions, the present application stands finally disposed of.
(Rajveev Misra, J.) Order Date :- 6.9.2018 Sushil/-
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Harish Pal Babbar vs State Of U P And Anr

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
06 September, 2018
Judges
  • Rajeev Misra
Advocates
  • Anshul Kumar Singhal Vinod Kumar Agarwal