Disposed

Dr Jahangir Chauhan v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC16 Jul 2024A227/2754/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court refused the prayer to quash proceedings under Section 138 NI Act, holding that disputed questions of fact cannot be adjudicated at this stage. The Court allowed the petition to be disposed of by permitting the filing of a discharge application within 30 days, staying coercive measures pending its consideration.

What did the court decide?

Permission to file discharge application within 30 days; stay on coercive measures.

Dr Jahangir Chauhan vs State of Up and Another — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:151770

¶2

Court No. - 87

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2754 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Dr Jahangir Chauhan Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Aftab Alam Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Satish Kumar Tyagi

¶5

Hon'ble Ms. Nand Prabha Shukla,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The instant petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed with a prayer to quash the order dated 18.6.2022 passed in complaint case no. 5952 of 2022 (Mohammad Aslam vs. Jahangir Chauhan) under Section 138 of N.I. Act, Police Station Civil Lines, District Meerut by means of which the petitioner has been summoned by the learned trial Court below to face trial under Section 138 of N.I. Act, 1881 as well as entire proceedings of the aforesaid complaint case pending in the Court of learned ACJM, Room No. 5, Meerut and the order dated 19.10.2023 passed in Criminal Revision No. 429 of 2022 (Dr. Jahangir Chauhan vs. Mohammad Aslam) by means of which his revision against the order dated 18.6.2022 was dismissed.

¶8

From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case, at this stage, it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the petitioner. All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court. Only in cases where the Court finds that there has been failure of justice or misuse of judicial mechanism or procedure, sentence or order was not correct, this power may be exercised to prevent the abuse of process of miscarriage of justice.

¶9

Accordingly, prayer of the petitioner is refused.

¶10

However, in view of the submissions, it is provided that in case the petitioner moves an application for discharge through counsel within 30 days, the same shall be disposed of by the Trial Court by a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law within two weeks thereafter.

¶11

For a period of 30 days or till the disposal of the discharge application, whichever is earlier, no coercive measures shall be taken against the petitioner in the aforesaid case.

¶12

With the aforesaid direction, this petition is disposed of.

¶13

Order Date :- 18.9.2024

¶14

Monika

¶15

Digitally signed by :- MONIKA KESARWANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Dr Jahangir Chauhan v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr Jahangir Chauhan v. State of Up 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Meraj vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Aysha and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Tannu Alias Tamanna and Another vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Manoj Kumar Pandey vs State of Up and another

Nitesh Prasad vs State of Up

Munna Maddheshiya vs State of Up and 4 Others