Shailendra Kumar Rawat v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC19 Nov 2024A482/10386/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash a summoning order in a cheque bounce case, the Court stayed the execution of the order against the applicant and dismissed the complaint case pending while the applicant submitted he was not a signatory to the cheque.

What did the court decide?

Stayed the execution of the impugned summoning order regarding the applicant; dismissed the complaint case pending.

Shailendra Kumar Rawat vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 14

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10386 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Shailendra Kumar Rawat Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Sharma,Shailesh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been moved by the applicants for quashing the impugned summoning order dated 02.03.2024 issued by Additional Court Room No.7, Lucknow in Complaint Case No.79867 of 2022 (Lateef Ahmad vs. Shailendra Kumar Rawat and another), under Section 138 of N. I. Act and also dismissed the Complaint Case No.79867 of 2022 (Lateef Ahmad vs. Shailendra Kumar Rawat and another), pending in the Court of Additional Court Room No.7.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant along with co-accused, Rita Rawat, who is wife of the present applicant came to be summoned by means of the impugned order dated 02.03.2024. The only proprietor/ authorized signatory is the co-accused, Rita Rawat. The applicant is not a signatory to the cheque in question nor he has been shown to be concerned with the issuance of cheque in any capacity. He has also drawn attention of this Court to the page 27 of the instant application, which is a photocopy of the cheque of an amount of Rs.8,00,000/issued by the co-accused, Rita Rawat only. He, thus, submits that issuing process against present applicant is nothing but an abuse of process of the Court.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer by submitting that this is not a stage where such disputed facts may be adjudicated. However, he has been unable to

¶9

dispute the aforesaid factual submissions.

¶10

Having heard the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and upon perusal of record, the matter requires consideration.

¶11

Notice on behalf of opposite party no.1 has been accepted by the office of learned A.G.A.

¶12

Issue notice to the opposite party no.2, returnable at an early date.

¶13

Steps be taken within a week.

¶14

Let counter affidavit be filed within four weeks.

¶15

A week's time thereafter shall be available to learned counsel for the applicant to file rejoinder affidavit.

¶16

List this case after eight weeks along with service report.

¶17

Meanwhile, the impugned summoning order dated 02.03.2024 or any process issued pursuant thereto, shall not be given effect to qua the applicant, namely, Shailendra Kumar Rawat.

¶18

Order Date :- 19.11.2024 Mahesh

¶19

Digitally signed by :- MAHESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Shailendra Kumar Rawat v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shailendra Kumar Rawat v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. 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

Deshraj Gaud @ Deshraj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Prin. Panchayat Raj Lko and 3 Others

Shiv Ji Singh Vs State of U.P.Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko and 2 Others

Ashutosh Singh Pno. 062370253 Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Anil Kumar Sharma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Forest Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Raj Narayan Pno. No. 872260351 vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Govt. Lko. and 2 Others

Krishna Gopal Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Sectt. Lko and 3 Others