Dismissed

Pravesh Kumar Bharti v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC13 Feb 2023A482/3631/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant sought quashing of proceedings under Section 138 N.I. Act claiming defective issuance and non-receipt of legal notice. The High Court rejected the application, finding no illegality in the summons order and holding that procedural disputes regarding notice receipt are to be resolved during trial.

What did the court decide?

Application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceeding was rejected.

Pravesh Kumar Bharti Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3631 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Pravesh Kumar Bharti Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Madhukar Maurya,Anjani Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶5

List revised.

¶6

Heard Shri Anjani Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Arti Agarwal, learned counsel for the State and perused the material brought on record.

¶7

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant-Pravesh Kumar Bharti with the prayer to allow this application and quash the Complaint dated 5.1.2021 registered as Complaint No.23 of 2020 (Jitendra Kumar Yadav Vs. Pravesh Kumar Bharti), u/s 138 N.I. Act, 1881, P.S. Shahganj, District Jaunpur pending before Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate 2, Jaunpur as well as order summoning dated 9.3.2022 passed by Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate 2, Jaunpur in Case No.153 of 2021 (Jitendra Kumar Yadav Vs. Pravesh Kumar Bharti) u/s 138 N.I. Act, 1881, P.S. Shahganj, District Jaunpur and all consequential proceedings thereon and to stay the further proceeding of aforesaid case during the pendency of this Application before this Hon'ble Court, otherwise the applicants shall suffer irreparable loss and injury.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has not proved the sending of the notice regarding dishonour of the cheque and it's receipt by the accused. It is argued that as such the complaint as filed is defective and the trial court could not have taken cognizance upon the same but the trial court failed to consider it and has illegally summoned the applicant to face trial vide it's order dated 9.3.2022. It is argued that the proceedings thus are abuse of process of Court and deserves to be quashed.

¶9

Per contra, learned counsel for the state opposed the prayer for quashing and argued that law with regards to issuance of notice is trite. The complainant has averred in para 3 of his complaint that he has sent legal notice through his lawyer which has been received by the accused-applicant. He has also filed the copy of the receipt of the registered post as his documents in support of his complaint. Since the complaint states of sending of notice and

¶10

there is an averment regarding it's receipt by the accused-applicant, the said fact thus gets complete. Any doubt with regards to the same would need evidence and would need it to be sorted out in the trial and further the records show that vide order dated 29.9.2022, bailable warrants have been issued against the applicant as he had failed to join the case before the trial court on the call of summons by it.

¶11

After having heard learned counsel for both the parties and perusing the records, in view of the above, this Court does not find any irregularity or illegality in the impugned order dated 9.3.2022 and the impugned proceedings as pending before the trial court.

¶12

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. thus stands rejected.

¶13

(Samit Gopal, J.)

¶14

Order Date :- 13.2.2023 Gaurav

¶15

Digitally signed by :- GAURAV KULSHRESTHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Pravesh Kumar Bharti v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pravesh Kumar Bharti 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

Dilshad Khan and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shitu @ Shitu Ali Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sonvarsi Devi Vs State of U.P. and 8 Others

Ankit Kumar and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shikha Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

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