Court No. - 28
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 18126 of 2008 Applicant :- Udai Veer Singh And Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Alok Sharma,S.R. Verma
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Case called out in revised list. No one appears on behalf of applicant to press this application. Learned A.G.A. for State is present. Even though, counter affidavit has been filed by Mr. Alok Sharma, Advocate, but neither he nor any counsel on his behalf is present.
This application under section 482 Cr. P. C. has been filed challenging summoning order dated 23.10.2007 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Mathura, in Complaint Case No. 236/IV/2008 (Kishanpal Singh Vs. Bhupendra Malik), under section 138 N.I. Act, P.S. Kotwali, District Mathura as well as entire proceedings of the above mentioned complaint case.
Present case came up for admission on 21.8.2008 and this Court passed the following interim order:-
"Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA.
Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the main allegation is against Bhupendra Malik and applicant no. 1, 2 and 3 neither entered into an agreement with the opposite party no. 2 for the construction of civil work nor opposite party no. 2 was doing any work. The name of the applicants have been involved just to harass and put undue pressure.
Issue notice to opposite party no. 2 returnable at an early date.
Six week time is granted to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within two weeks thereafter.
List on 17.9.2008.
Till the next date of listing, further proceedings of Case No. 236/IX/2008 under section 138 Negotiable Instrument Act pending before the Judicial Magistrate Ist Mathura, District Mathura shall remain stayed."
Defence raised by applicants in present application disowning his liability under the disputed cheque is disputed defence of applicants which cannot be examined in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr. P. C. The truthfulness of the defence raised by applicants can better be examined in trial proceedings, which have been stayed by this Court.
In view of above, no good ground is made out to interfere with the impugned order of summoning or to quash the proceedings of above mentioned complaint case. Consequently, present criminal misc. application fails and is, hereby, dismissed.
Office is directed to inform the Court below about this order by fax within 48 hours.
Order Date :- 28.11.2019 HSM