Dismissed

Dhruv Jalan v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC13 May 2019A482/19011/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court disposed of Section 482 Cr.P.C. application without adjudicating merits. Directed applicant to participate in proceedings; if he applies for relief within three weeks showing innocence, bail may be granted.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed without deciding merits; applicant granted three weeks to challenge grievance in trial court to obtain bail and prevent coercive action.

Dhruv Jalan Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 19011 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Dhruv Jalan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ronak Chaturvedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.

¶5

Heard G.S. Chaturvedi, learned senior counsel assisted by Sri Ronak Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of this application.

¶6

The present applicant under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of summoning order dated 25.05.2018 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Gautam Budh Nagar in Complaint Case no.372 of 2018 (now renumbered as 2488 of 2018) (Inder Dev Singh Musafir vs. Dhruv Jalan), under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Police Station- Sector 58, NOIDA.

¶7

Bare perusal of the averments made in the accompanying affidavit in this application and upon consideration of document annexed therewith including the complaint filed by opposite party no.2 under Section 138 N.I. Act, at this juncture, nothing can be elaborated on merit on the point of summoning order dated 25.05.2018 passed in aforesaid complaint case number.

¶8

However, it is evident from the record of this application- U/s 482 Cr.P.C. that during course of proceeding in the trial court, an 'Exemption Application' was moved by the

¶9

applicant, the same was allowed by the court below on 17.10.2018 fixing date on 26.10.2018. On 26.10.2018 again applicant moved exemption application, but this time court below rejected the application of the applicant and issued Bailable Warrant/Rs.15,000/- fixing next date on 13.11.2018. Again on that date (13.11.2018) bailable warrant/Rs.15000/- was issued, which bailable warrant of the applicant was converted into non- bailable warrant in the subsequent course of proceeding.

¶10

However, as a measure of last opportunity, applicant is directed to participate in the proceeding of the court below first and to challenge the validity of the summoning order at subsequent stage by showing his innocence, at his convenience.

¶11

In this view of the matter, it is directed that in case, the applicant moves appropriate application for redressal of his grievance within a period of three weeks' from today, then court below may consider his application sympathetically and it may pass appropriate reasoned order in accordance with law and in that event the order of the court below dated 13.11.2018 should be made effective and bailable warrant for Rs.15,000/- may be acted upon and bail may be granted to the applicant, provides he promises to cooperate in the proceedings.

¶12

For a period of three weeks' from today, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant.

¶13

In the meanwhile, the parties shall explore the possibility of negotiation before the court below.

¶14

With the above direction, the instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is finally disposed off.

¶15

It is made clear that observations so made shall not touch the merit of the case and the court below shall be free to act in accordance with law while deciding the case.

¶16

Order Date :- 13.5.2019 Raj

Dhruv Jalan v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhruv Jalan v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhagwan Deen and Another Vs State of U.P.and Another

Rafiq Khan and 3 Others Vs State of Up and Another

Satyapal Singh Kashyap Vs State of Up and Another

Triveni Prasad @ Triveni Gupta Vs State of U.P. and Another

M/S Agra Sales and Marketing Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Prem Shankar Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another