Disposed

Rohit Agrawal v. State of U.P. . and Another

Allahabad HC25 Aug 2023A482/21325/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of an application seeking to quash a Section 138 NI Act case. No merits were considered; the applicant was directed to approach the trial court to compound the offence by depositing the amount within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed of with liberty to compound the offence by depositing the amount before the trial court within two weeks.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:171850

¶2

Court No. - 90

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 21325 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Rohit Agrawal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. . And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Girish Chandra Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J.

¶6

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

¶7

The applicant has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the judgments and orders dated 12.5.2023 passed by Additional District & Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court, Court No.2, Aligarh in Crl. Revision No.113 of 2023 (Rohit Agarwal Vs. State of U.P. and another) and order dated 29.09.2021 passed by Presiding Officer, Additional Court, Aligarh in Crl. Case No. 293 of 2021, under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act (in brevity N.I. Act), Police Station Sasnigate, District, Aligarh

¶8

Facts culled out from the averment made in the instant application are that Ashish Singh (opposite party No.2) has filed the complaint dated 18.01.2021 under Sections 138 of N.I. Act with an averment that the complainant has supplied building material to the accused (applicant herein) worth Rs.1,21,856/-. However, out of that amount Rs,1,856/- was given in cash and for remaining amount accused has furnish a cheque bearing No.000489 dated 15.11.2020 amounting Rs.1,20,000/- drawn on ICICI Bank. However, when the present applicant has presented the aforesaid cheque in his bank namely S.B.I. the cheque was bounced with an endorsement of "fund in sufficient". Learned Magistrate, vide order dated 29.9.2021, has issued process against the present applicant under Section 138 of N.I. Act after considering the contents of the complaint and the statements of complainant under Section 200 Cr.P.C., which is under challenge before this Court.

¶9

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that, due to misunderstanding between the parties, opposite party No.2 has filed the complaint under Section 138 of N.I. Act whereas there is no intention of the present applicant to usurp the money of complainant as shown in the complaint. It is further submitted that present applicant is ready to return the entire

¶10

money amounting Rs.1,20,000/- which is subject matter of cheque No.00489.

¶11

Learned AGA has contended that the present applicant has an alternative remedy to move an application for compounding of the offence for which process has been issued against him.

¶12

In this conspectus, as above, no fruitful purpose would be served to keep this matter pending, therefore, without considering the merits of the case, instant application disposed of finally with liberty to the present applicant to move an application before the court concerned for compounding of the offence in pursuance of the dictum of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babulal H. (2010) 5 SCC 663 . It is made clear that in case applicant moves an application for compounding of the offence along with the bank draft for the amount in question before the court below within a period of two weeks same shall be considered and decided by the trial court within a period of one month, thereafter.

¶13

As such, instant application is finally disposed of .

¶14

Order Date :- 25.8.2023 Md Faisal

¶15

Digitally signed by :- MOHD FAISAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rohit Agrawal v. State of U.P. . and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohit Agrawal 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

Amit and 2 Others Vs State of Up and Another

Amit Gupta Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vakil Ahmad Hashmi and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Shriman Shukla @ Saurabh Shukla Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Lal Puri Goswami and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sunil Gautam and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another