Disposed

Arun Prakash v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC1 May 2023A482/13237/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a Section 482 application filed to quash compounding proceedings under the N.I. Act. The court issued directions to the trial court to apply specific guidelines from Damodar S. Prabhu for allowing compounding without coercive steps pending disposal.

What did the court decide?

Directions issued for trial court to dispose compounding application under Damodar S. Prabhu guidelines within three months; NBW suspended.

Arun Prakash Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 13237 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Arun Prakash Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shrish Chandra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This Criminal Misc. Application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 7736 of 2018 (Arun Prakash Vs State of UP and others), under sections 138 N.I. Act, District Allahabad pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Allaabad including the NBW dated 16.3.2022.

¶7

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

¶13

(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.

¶14

(d) Finally, if the application for compounding is made before this

¶15

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 within a period of three months. Till then no coercive steps shall be taken against the applicant pursuant to NBW issued against the applicant.

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 1.5.2023 RavindraKSingh

¶19

Digitally signed by :- RAVINDRA KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Arun Prakash v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arun Prakash 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

Dinesh Pratap Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shahid and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ghanshyam Vashishth and 4 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another

Yashwant and 3 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and 1 Ors.

Dharmu Alias Dharma Alias Bhrambhjeet Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajkaran and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another