Court No. - 80
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 14300 of 2021 Applicant :- Virendra Kumar Kesarwani Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Abhishek Kumar Srivastava,Vivek Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant for quashing the summoning order dated 28.11.2019 as well as the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 291 of 2019 ( Jeet Lal Vs. Virendra Kumar Kesarwani), under Section 138 of N.I. Act, P.S. Sarai Inayat, District- Allahabad, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 17, Allahabad.
As per the allegations made in the complaint, it is alleged that the applicant had issued a Cheque No. 438786 for an amount of Rs. 8,00,000/- dated 5.2.2019 in favour of Opposite Party No.2, however, on presentation of the said cheque, the same was dishonoured by the bank. After the dishonour of the cheque, a notice was sent to the applicant to make good the payment however, despite being noticed the due amount was not paid as such, the present complaint u/s 138 of N.I. Act was filed.
On the basis of the said complaint, learned Magistrate has recorded the statements of the witnesses and after making the requisite enquiry under Sections 200 and 202 CrPC has summoned the applicant to face trial under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act vide order dated 28.11.2019.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that no due debt or liability exists, therefore, proceedings u/s 138 of N.I. Act cannot be drawn against the applicant.
Per contra; learned A.G.A. has submitted that disputed question of due debt or liability can not be considered at this stage and the learned Magistrate after requisite enquiry and considering the allegations made in the complaint, had summoned the applicant to face trial and there is no illegality or infirmity in the impugned order.
Having considered the rival submissions made by the counsel for the parties and keeping in view the fact that disputed question of due debt or liability cannot be considered at this stage when the evidence is yet to come and the evidence is to be seen only at the time of trial. The impugned order is just, proper and legal and do not call for any interference.
The present application u/s 482 being devoid of merit is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 16.8.2021 KU