Allowed

Aditya Dixit v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC18 May 2023A482/8814/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application to quash proceedings under Section 138 NI Act where the complainant, after receiving the disputed amount, expressed no desire to prosecute further. Court held quashing wastes resources and prevents abuse of process, allowing the application.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings under Section 138 NI Act and summoning order were quashed. Police records were to be marked as quashed.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:109424

¶2

Court No. - 64

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8814 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Aditya Dixit Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shailendra Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Hemant Kumar

¶5

Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.

¶6

An affidavit has been filed by Mr. Hemant Kumar, Advocate on behalf of the complainant-opposite party No.2-Sanction House Pvt. Ltd., which is an affidavit of Mr. Neeraj Kumar Mittal S/o Late S.K. Mittal, the person authorized to act on behalf of Sanction House Pvt. Ltd.

¶7

Let this affidavit be taken on record and numbered by the office.

¶8

This application has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the Complaint No. 11251 of 2019 (Filing No. 59268 of 2019), under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, Police Station-T.P. Nagar, District Meerut pending in the court of Additional Civil Judge-VII, Meerut and summoning order dated 23.11.2019 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate/Additional Civil Judge (S.D.)-8, Meerut.

¶9

In the affidavit filed today in Court on behalf of opposite party no.2 he has taken a stand to the effect that he does not want to prosecute the complainant any further as stated in paragraph No. 3 and 4, which reads as under:

¶10

"3. That on 20.04.2023 the opposite party no.2 has received the amount of Rs. 55,000/- through demand draft No. 402762 dated 23.03.2023 before the lower court below. The copy of the demand draft No. 402762 dated 23.03.2023 and the copy of the order sheet are being collectively filed herewith and marked as Annexure No.1 .

¶11

4. That since the opposite party no.2 has received the amount of Rs. 55,000/-, thus he does want to further persue (sic.) the prosecution of the applicant in the complaint Case No. 11251 of 2019 under Section 138 of N.I. Act, P.S.-T.P. Nagar, DistrictMeerut pending before learned court of Magistrate concerned at Meerut and this Hon'ble Court may pass the appropriate orders."

¶12

In view of the stand taken by the complainant-opposite party, no useful purpose will be served by permitting the impugned proceedings to continue. It would also lead to wastage of time, energy and resources with no profit to anyone. In the circumstances, in order to prevent abuse of process of Court and to secure the ends of justice, this Court is of the opinion that the impugned proceedings ought to be quashed.

¶13

In the result this application succeeds and is allowed.

¶14

The proceedings of Complaint No. 11251 of 2019 (Filing No. 59268 of 2019), under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, Police Station-T.P. Nagar, District Meerut pending in the court of Additional Civil Judge-VII, Meerut and summoning order dated 23.11.2019 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate/Additional Civil Judge (S.D.)-8, Meerut are hereby quashed.

¶15

An entry shall be caused to be made in the G.D. of Police Station T.P. Nagar, District Meerut that all proceedings arising out of Complaint No. 11251 of 2019 stand quashed under orders of this Court. It shall be ensured by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate/Additional Civil Judge (S.D.)-8, Meerut that this part of the order is carried out in the GD of the Police Station concerned.

¶16

Let a copy of this order be forwarded to the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate/Additional Civil Judge (S.D.)-8, Meerut through the learned Sessions Judge, Meerut and the S.H.O., P.S. T.P. Nagar, District Meerut, through the Superintendent of Police, Meerut, by the Registrar (Compliance) within a week.

¶17

Order Date :- 18.5.2023 Anurag/-

¶18

Digitally signed by :- ANURAG JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Aditya Dixit v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aditya Dixit 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

Noor Hasan and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Aliza and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Wilium Alfred Vs State of U.P. and Another

Komal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mahant Suresh Das Vs State of U.P.

Shabad Ahmad and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another