Disposed

Avaneesh Singh v. State of U.P.and Another

Allahabad HC7 Feb 2023A483/94/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court applied Section 483 Cr.P.C. to direct the trial court to expedite proceedings in a cheque dishonour case pending for four years. Mandating compliance with Section 143(2) and (3) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the Court ordered the trial court to fix short dates, avoid adjournments except on unavoidable grounds with heavy costs, and conclude the trial promptly.

What did the court decide?

The Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 4, Allahabad is directed to expeditiously conclude the case by fixing short dates and imposing heavy costs for unjustifiable adjournments.

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

¶1

Court No. - 93

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 483 No. - 94 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Avaneesh Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Om Prakash Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Surendra Singh-I,J.

¶5

The applicant has filed this application under Section 483 Cr.P.C. for directing the trial court to expedite the proceedings of Complaint Case No. 723 of 2019, (Avaneesh Singh Vs. Rajesh Mishra) under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, Police Station- Civil Line, District- Allahabad, pending before the court of Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 4, Allahabad, expeditiously.

¶6

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that complaint case was filed on 25.05.2019 which was registered as Complaint Case No. 723 of 2019, (Avaneesh Singh Vs. Rajesh Mishra). The trial court vide order dated 15.11.2019 summoned the opposite party no. 2 to face trial u/s 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. The opposite party no. 2/accused filed Criminal Misc. Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. No. 6935 of 2021 before this Court challenging the aforesaid summoning order which was disposed of vide order dated 07.09.2021 and no coercive measure could be taken against the opposite party no. 2. The opposite party no. 2 failed to ensure the compliance of this Court's order and he was taken into custody. He was released on bail on 21.04.2022. The evidence from the side of complainant was filed on 10.10.2022. Opposite party no.2/accused absented himself and on 12.12.2022, non-bailable warrant was issued against him. On 17.12.2022, opposite party no.2/accused surrendered before the court and moved application for cancellation of warrant. The warrant was cancelled. On 17.01.2023, the complainant filed copy of evidence on record and opposite party no.2/accused was directed to receive copies and 02.03.2023 has been fixed for cross.

¶7

Heard Sri Om Prakash Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and perused the order sheet of the trial court available on record.

¶8

It appears that the trial of the case is not progressing with the speed as mandated by Section 143 (2) and (3) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Till date, the statement charge of the opposite party no.2/accused has not yet been recorded. The case is

¶9

pending for about 4 years. The court should be vigilant to preclude adjournment of the case on flimsy grounds.

¶10

The provisions of Section 143 (2) and (3) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 provides for expeditious disposal of case which is as follows :

¶11

143. Power of Court to try cases summarily-

¶12

(2) The trial of a case under this section shall, so far as practicable, consistently with the interests of justice, be continued from day to day until its conclusion, unless the Court finds the adjournment of the trial beyond the following day to be necessary for reasons to be recorded in writing.

¶13

(3) Every trial under this section shall be conducted as expeditiously as possible and an endeavour shall be made to conclude the trial within six months from the date of filing of the complaint.

¶14

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the aforesaid provisions of Section 143 (2) and (3) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 4, Allahabad is directed to expeditiously conclude the disposal of the complaint case by fixing short dates and not giving any adjournment to either of the parties unless it becomes unavoidable and that too, with heavy costs.

¶15

The application is disposed of, accordingly.

¶16

Order Date :- 7.2.2023 KS

¶17

Digitally signed by :- KISHAN SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Avaneesh Singh v. State of U.P.and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Avaneesh Singh 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

Shakti Mohan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pushpendra Kumar Alias Pintu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vineet Vs State of U.P. and Another

Uttam Dubey Vs State of U.P. and Another

Atal Joshi Alias Awadh Bihari Vs State of U.P. and Another

Tahir Singh Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another