The High Court dismissed this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash a summoning order in a cheque bounce case. The Court held that the record demonstrated a prima facie case and sufficient grounds for proceeding, noting that issues of fact and merit cannot be adjudicated at this stage.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 23
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9126 of 2019
Applicant :- Faisal Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.
Heard Sri Rajesh Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State-respondent and perused the record.
Present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant for quashing the summoning order dated 22.9.2018 passed by learned ACJM, Court No.6, Moradabad in Case No.1420 of 2018 and subsequent proceeding thereof.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that present criminal proceeding has been falsely instituted against the applicant for the purpose of harassment and this case is an abuse of process of court. It is further contended that learned Magistrate has not adopted the prescribed procedure before passing the summoning order which is arbitrary and liable to be set aside. It is further contended on behalf of the applicant that summoning order does not disclose date of notice, dishonour of cheque and deposit of cheque. He pointed out some documents and statement in support of his contentions.
Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer.
It appears from the record that complainant Rafiya moved a complaint in the court of CJM concerned against accusedpresent applicant under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act which came to be registered as complaint case, learned Magistrate took cognisance over it and took evidence of complainant under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and her witnesses under Section 202 Cr.P.C. and found a prima facie case and sufficient ground for proceeding, passed the impugned summoning order against the accused-applicant for facing trial under Section 138 of N.I. Act.
It is settled legal position of law that at the time of passing summoning order, court has to see whether there are sufficient grounds for proceeding or not. Submission made at the Bar relate to the fact and merit of the case, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in the proceeding under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
From perusal of the material available on record, it cannot be said that no prima facie case is made out against the applicant or sufficient ground for proceeding was not there. At this stage, only prima-facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the cases of R.P. Kapur v. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 S.C.C. (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar v. P.P. Sharma, 1992 S.C.C. (Cr.) 192 and Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (para-10) 2005 S.C.C. (Cr.) 283.
I do not say any good ground so as to justify interference in the matter.
The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 29.3.2019
Vivek Kr.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the summoning order against the applicant under Section 138 N.I. Act is liable to be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Whether there is a prima facie case against the applicant to sustain criminal proceedings.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
R.P. Kapur v. State of PunjabReferred¶11
R.P. Kapur v. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866 · Who else cites this
State of Haryana v. Bhajan LalReferred¶11
State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 S.C.C. (Cr.) 426 · Who else cites this
State of Bihar v. P.P. SharmaReferred¶11
State of Bihar v. P.P. Sharma, 1992 S.C.C. (Cr.) 192 · Who else cites this
Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v. Mohd. Saraful Haq and anotherReferred¶11
Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Faisal
State Of Up
Rajendra Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
