Disposed

Mohd. Hasan v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC20 Jul 2022A482/21149/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the High Court directed the trial court to conclude proceedings under the N.I. Act within six months, fixed hearing dates every week, and imposed a financial penalty for adjournments.

What did the court decide?

Direction to conclude proceedings within six months; fix three dates per week; adjournments to be granted at cost of Rs. 2,500 per date.

Mohd. Hasan Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 21149 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Mohd. Hasan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Narendra Kumar,Ram Dular Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Narendra Kumar, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State.

¶6

Perused the record.

¶7

This application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for a direction to Judical Magistrate, Azamgarh to decide Complaint Case No. 2524 of 2019 (Mohd. Hasan Vs. Daya Ram) under section 138 N.I. Act, Police Station- Pawai, District Azamgarh expeditiously and within a time bound period, fixed by this Court.

¶8

Learned counsel for applicant contends that above mentioned complaint case was instituted in the year 2019. Summoning Order was passed by Court below on 3.3.2020. However, accused-opposite party-2 failed to owner the same. Consequently, Non bailable warrant was issued against opposite party-2. Subsequent to above, opposite party-2 appeared before the Court below and was enlarged on bail vide order dated 14.10.2021. Since then, accused opposite party-2 has been avoiding the proceedings of above mentioned complaint case.

¶9

Mr. Narendra Kumar, the learned counsel for applicant then invited attention of Court to the provisions contained in Section 143 (3) N.I. Act and on basis thereof, he submits that proceedings under sections 138 N.I. Act ought to be completed within a period of six months. However, in the present case, inspite of the fact that a period of more than three years have rolled by, the statement of accused has not yet been recorded. The legislative mandate has been clearly ignored by Court below.

¶10

On the aforesaid premise, learned counsel for applicant submits that interest of justice shall be served in case a direction is issued by this Court to Court below to conclude the proceedings of above mentioned complaint case within a time bound period fixed by this Court.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. does not dispute the submissions urged by learned counsel for applicant.

¶12

Having heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. for State and upon perusal of record, this Court finds that no useful purpose shall be served by keeping this application pending.

¶13

Accordingly, this application is disposed of finally with a direction to Judicial Magistrate, Azamgarh to proceed with aforementioned complaint case with all expedition without granting unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties by fixing three dates in a week. Court below shall conclude the proceedings of above mentioned complaint case, within a period of six months. It is further directed that in case adjournment is inevitable, same shall be granted only on the cost of Rs. 2,500/- per date, payable to complainant and vice versa.

¶14

Order Date :- 20.7.2022 Arshad

¶15

Digitally signed by ARSHAD MAHMOOD Date: 2022.07.21 17:16:29 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mohd. Hasan v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Hasan 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

Dharvendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Gaurav Jaiswal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vijay Shankar and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Bitai @ Ganga Prasad and 4 Others Vs State of U.P.and Another

Simrandeep Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rohit Gupta Vs State of U.P. and Another