Court No. - 65
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 1394 of 2015 Petitioner :- Ranveer Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Secy. And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Arvind Srivastava,Rishabh Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- Govt.Advocate
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard Sri Rishabh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Abhinav Prasad, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the record.
The petitioner, through the present writ petition has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court with a prayer for quashing the impugned order dated 1.10.2014 passed by the Special Sessions Judge,(E.C.Act)/ Addl. District Judge, Ballia in Criminal Revision No.56 of 2013 and order dated 18.2.2013 passed by C.J.M.,Ballia in Case No.4987 of 2012.
Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is the complainant in the present case. It is contended that a cheque for Rs.20.00 lacs dated 15.7.2012 was given to the petitioner against the amount of Rs.20.00 lacs received by respondent no.2 for the purpose of extension of institution in question run by respondent no.2 and for providing gas agency. The cheque was given to the petitioner for repaying the amount of Rs.20.00 lacs. When the cheque was presented by the petitioner on 22.9.2012 before the Bank, it was informed that there was no fund in the account of respondent no,2. Consequently the petitioner gave a notice on 3.10.2012 and again on 7.10.2012 to the respondent no.2 demanding Rs.20.00 lacs.. It is next contended that the amount was not paid by respondent no.2 to the petitioner although the statutory time of 15 days elapsed. The petitioner therefore filed a complaint on 17.11.2012 before the Magistrate and the Magistrate vidt its order dated 18.2.2013 refused to summon the respondent no.2 which was passed illegally. Aggrieved by the order of the Magistrate a criminal revision was filed before the Special Sessions Judge,(E.C.Act)/ Addl. District Judge, Ballia, which was also dismissed vide its order dated 1.10.2014, hence the present petition.
In support of his contention learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a judgement of this Court in the case of Mazhar Husain Vs. State of U.P.& & Another reported in 2008(8) ADJ 261.
It is contented that the offence has been committed under Section 138 N.I.Act and Section 406 IPC It is next contended that the court below has not properly considered the submissions advanced by the petitioner and also not appreciated the evidence while rejecting the revision.
In view of the above, the impugned order dated 1.10.2014 passed by the Special Sessions Judge,(E.C.Act)/ Addl. District Judge, Ballia in Criminal Revision No.56 of 2013 and order dated 18.2.2013 passed by C.J.M.,Ballia in Case No.4987 of 2012 are hereby set aside and consequently the petition is allowed.
However, without considering the merits of the case and the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, the court below is directed to pass afresh order in accordance with law after providing him sufficient opportunity of hearing,within two months from the date of production of certified copy of the order.
The trial court is also directed to expedite and conclude the trial of the aforesaid case, preferably within a period of 6 months from the date of production of certified copy of the order, if there is no legal impediment..
With the above direction, this petition is finally disposed off.
Order Date :- 29.11.2019 IA