Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Panorama Studios And Others vs State Of U P And Another

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|31 May, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 64
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 22057 of 2019 Applicant :- Panorama Studios And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Kamal Kaushal Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of the applicants with a prayer to quash the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 125 of 2018 (Prashant Sharma Versus Panorama Studios and others), under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, Police Station Kotwali, District Ghaziabad, pending in the court of Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division)/Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.5, Ghaziabad as well as impugned summoning order dated 7.5.2018, passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division)/Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.5, Ghaziabad.
Claim is that no proceeding under Section-138 N.I. Act ought to have been initiated against the applicants in view of fact that the document proves that money more than that was required to be paid by the applicants to opposite party no.2 has been deposited in the account of opposite party no.2, besides paying some amount in cash.
Now, the point is that the proceedings of this case have become redundant and no useful purpose will be served, if the proceeding is allowed to go on from hence onward. The purpose and the scheme under the N.I. Act is to compensate the other side for the money given by him to the accused. Here, in this case, the documents and the record profusely reflect that nothing remained to be paid as such on account of fact that the entire payment has been made regarding the liability accrued against the applicants for payment.
Also heard the learned A.G.A.
Assuming it to be that the contention so raised is correct, then the lower court is required to cautiously scrutinise the plea and to ensure whether full payment in the shape of claim raised by the complainant-opposite party no.2 has been made or not and in case, the full payment has already been made, then admittedly the proceeding under section-138 N.I. Act would be treated to have become redundant and accordingly, consequential order shall be passed and in case, after exercise is done by the lower court and it is discovered that something remains to be paid, then the applicants shall be at liberty to make payment of that outstanding amount as well at their will. In case of non deposit the court below is to proceed further with the case.
With the aforesaid direction, this application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 31.5.2019 S Rawat
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

Panorama Studios And Others vs State Of U P And Another

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
31 May, 2019
Judges
  • Arvind Kumar Mishra I
Advocates
  • Kamal Kaushal Upadhyay