Court No. - 64
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 21604 of 2019 Applicant :- Vinay Gupta Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shailendra Kumar Ojha,Ashutosh Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the order dated 07.05.2018 arising out of Complaint Case no. 2984 of 2015, under Section 138 N.I. Act, P.S. Govind Nagar, Kanpur Nagar, pending in the court of A.C.M.M., Room No.3, Kanpur Nagar.
Grievance is that the court below vide its order impugned dated 07.05.2018 has rejected application moved by the applicant under Section-138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, which provides for determination of debt and liability. However, the court below perfunctorily without heeding to the contents brought before the court below regarding assessment of the liability upon opposite party no.2 has passed impugned order, which is not justified under facts and circumstances of the case. In the absence of the relevant papers, how can it be proved that the opposite party no.2 had earlier made payment of Rs. 10 lakhs to the applicant.
Also heard the learned A.G.A.
I have perused the order impugned dated 07.05.2018, whereby the applicant had requested the court below that relevant details right from the year 1996 in the shape of return and the copy of the pan card and the name of the owner of the house and the receipt of tenancy and other papers may be directed to be produced by the opposite party no.2- the complainant of the present case.
The court below after hearing both the sides considered it inappropriate to make any direction, however it observed that the case relates to Section 138 of the N.I. Act and the relevant papers required to be perused and acted upon at this stage have already been filed by opposite party no.2. At present, the papers required to be produced by opposite party no.2 have got no relevance with the proceeding under way. However, it was opened to the applicant by the court below that the applicant is within his resources to prove the aforesaid aspect as and when his turn for adducing evidence in defense is opened.
With the aforesaid direction, the court below disposed of the application dated 19.03.2018 moved by the present applicant. The order itself is reflective of positive approach adopted by the court below and the applicant himself has been left to his own resources and as per the mandate contained under Section-103 of the Indian Evidence Act, the assertion made is to be proved by the person who would fail, if no evidence is given.
Consequently, this application lacks merit and the same is dismissed.
Observation made shall have no bearing on the merit of the case.
Order Date :- 30.5.2019 S Rawat