Disposed

Sobur Casa Pvt. Ltd. v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC7 Dec 2022A482/38068/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a miscellaneous application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed to quash proceedings under Section 138 NI Act. It directed the trial court to allow compounding of the offence following the guidelines of Damodar S. Prabhu, contingent on payment of applicable costs.

What did the court decide?

Direction issued to trial court to dispose compounding application as per Damodar S. Prabhu guidelines; present application disposed.

Sobur Casa Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 88

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 38068 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Sobur Casa Pvt. Ltd. Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Tanisha Jahangir Monir Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Syed Aftab Husain Rizvi,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the Complaint dated 9.6.2021 giving rise to Complaint Case No. 9266 of 2021 (Saraswati Trust Vs. Sobur Kasha Pvt. Ltd.) under Section 138 N.I. Act, P.S. Baragaon, District Varanasi and summoning order dated 22.9.2022 pending in the Court of 5th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that offence is of compoundable nature and applicant is willing to move application for compounding of the offence. Learned counsel further submitted that he is confining his prayer only to the extent that as offence is compoundable, direction be issued to the trial court to act as per guidelines in the case of Damodar S. Prabhu vs. Sayed Babalal H. (2010) 5 SCC 663.

¶8

Considering the submission and prayer of the applicant, no purpose will be served in issuing notice to opposite party no.2. The matter can be disposed of at this stage with a proper direction in the light of Damodar S. Prabhu case (Supra).

¶9

In Damodar S. Prabhu case, the hon'ble Supreme Court has given the following guidelines:

¶10

"(i) In the circumstances, it is proposed as follows:

¶11

(a) That directions can be given that the writ of summons be suitably modified making it clear to the accused that he could make an application for compounding of the offences at the first or second hearing of the case and that if such an application is made, compounding may be allowed by the court without imposing any costs on the accused.

¶12

(b) If the accused does not make an application for compounding as aforesaid, then if an application for compounding is made before the Magistrate at a subsequent stage, compounding can be allowed subject to the condition that the accused will be required to pay 10% of the cheque amount

¶13

to be deposited as a condition for the compounding with the Legal Services Authority, or such authority as the court deems fit.

¶14

(c) Similarly, if the application for compounding is made before the Sessions Court or a High Court in revision or appeal, such compounding may be allowed on the condition that the accused pays 15% of the cheque amount by way of costs.

¶15

(d) Finally, if the application for compounding is made before this Supreme Court, the figure would increase to 20% of the cheque amount."

¶16

Hence direction is issued that if any application is moved by the applicant for compounding, the same shall be disposed of by the trial court in accordance with the aforesaid guidelines.

¶17

Accordingly, this criminal misc. application filed U/s 482 Cr.P.C. stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶18

Order Date :- 7.12.2022 Masarrat

¶19

Digitally signed by MASARRAT HUSAIN Date: 2022.12.07 16:31:44 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sobur Casa Pvt. Ltd. v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sobur Casa Pvt. Ltd. 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vinay Bajaj Vs State of U.P. and Others

Vinay Bajaj Vs State of U.P. and Others

Pradeep Kumar Sharma and Others Vs State of U.P. and Others

Alok Bodhankar and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Manoj Kumar Srivastava Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajesh Vs State of U.P. and Another