Dismissed

M/S Rikky Sports Private Limited v. State of U.P. and another

Allahabad HC1 Jul 2019A482/24262/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant, a company, filed this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash a summoning order in a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act regarding dishonoured cheques. The applicant contended that cheques never issued were used to lodge the complaint. The Court found no illegality in the impugned order, held it lacked merit, and dismissed the application.

What did the court decide?

No relief granted. The application to quash the summoning order was dismissed.

M/S Rikky Sports Private Limited Vs State of U.P. and… — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 72

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 24262 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- M/S Rikky Sports Private Limited Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Joshi,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Rakesh Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the impugned order dated 7.6.2019 as well as summoning order dated 26.2.2019 in Complaint Case Nos. 6595 and 6596 of 2018 (M/s Muskan Vs. M/s Rikky Sports) under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, P.S. Partapur, District Meerut.

¶7

It reflects from the record that the complaint was filed by the Opposite Party No. 2 for dishonouring three cheques amounting to Rs. 4,83,600/-, Rs. 2,00,000/- and 3,00,000/- respectively, in which the applicant was summoned under Section 138 of the N.I.Act vide order dated 26.2.2019. Against that order, the applicant filed Application under Section 482 No. 18045 of 2019 which was finally disposed of with the direction to the applicant to approach concerned Magistrate for redressal of his grievance and prayer for quashing the impugned summoning order dated 26.2.2019 has been refused.

¶8

Subsequently, before the concerned Magistrate the applicant had raised his grievances on the ground that he never issued any cheques to the complainant and his missing cheques were used by the complainant and on the basis of the same complaint under Section 138 of the N.I.Act has been filed. The concerned Magistrate vide impugned order dated 7th June 2019 rejected the application of the applicant on the ground that the applicant has been summoned after considering statement recorded under Sections 200 Cr.P.C. and 202 Cr.P.C. and whatever claim of the applicant that can be seen after the evidence. The said order is impugned in the present application.

¶9

Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the application has wrongly been summoned and missing cheques were used by the complainant for the purpose of lodging the present case.

¶10

I have considered the argument so raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and perused the record.

¶11

The prayer for quashing the summoning order had already been refused by this Court vide order dated 6.5.2019 passed in earlier Application filed under 482 Cr. P.C, only liberty is given to the applicant to move the application for redressal of his grievance and the Magistrate after considering the grievance of the applicant recorded that the case of the applicant for missing cheques used by the complainant cannot be seen at this stage.

¶12

I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the order impugned. The present application lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed.

¶13

Order Date :- 1.7.2019 Akbar

M/S Rikky Sports Private Limited v. State of U.P. and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Rikky Sports Private Limited 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vinod Kumar Pathak and Another Vs Deputy Director of Consolidation and 4 Others

Jamal Akhtar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Chanary Devi and 6 Others Vs Assistant Settlement Officer and 3 Others

Chandrabhushan Jaiswal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sunny Faujdar and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another

Maha Narayan and 02 Others Vs State of Up and Another