Application to quash a summoning order under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was dismissed on procedural grounds of belated filing, despite counsel opting out of pressing relief.
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. - 84 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6287 of 2021 Applicant :- Ankit Chauhan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shreesh Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J.
Heard Sri Shreesh Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Arvind Kumar, learned AGA for the State-Opposite party.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking to quash the summoning order dated 11.12.2018 in proceeding of Criminal Complaint Case No.4034 of 2018 (Narendra Kumar Varshney Vs. Ankit Chauhan), under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, Police Station Chandausi, District Sambhal and N.B.W. Order dated 01.02.2021 pending in the Court of Civil Judge (J.D.) Sambhal at Chandausi.
Learned AGA has raised an objection by pointing out that summoning order was issued way back on 11.12.2018 and consequent thereto non bailable warrants have also been issued on 01.02.2021 and the present application, which has been filed belatedly seeking to challenge the summoning order, is not liable to be entertained at this stage.
Learned counsel for the applicant fairly submitted that there is no clear reason to explain the delay in seeking to challenge the summoning order issued in the year 2018. He has sought to refer to the factual aspects of the matter and the defence of the applicant.
Learned AGA submits that the aforesaid contention would relate to disputed questions of fact and appreciation of evidence and cannot be looked into at this stage in the proceedings.
Counsel for the applicant has not disputed the aforesaid legal position and states that he does not wish to press the relief, as prayed for, in the application.
Having regard to the aforestated facts the present application stands dismissed.
Order Date :- 26.7.2021 Nitendra
(Dr. Y.K. Srivastava, J.)
Ankit Chauhan
State of U.P.
Yogendra Kumar Srivastava
Nitendra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
