Mahesh Chandra Srivastava v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC17 Dec 2024A482/11496/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application to quash a summoning order in a Section 138 cheque-dishonour complaint on the claim that the cheques were issued by someone else. Court issued notice, set timelines for affidavits, listed for February 2025, and directed interim suspension of the summoning order and process qua the applicant only.

What did the court decide?

Impugned summoning order dated 06.08.2024 and any process pursuant thereto shall not be given effect to qua the applicant until further hearing.

Mahesh Chandra Srivastava vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 14

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11496 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Mahesh Chandra Srivastava Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anuj Pandey,Anand Kumar Yadav

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri M.A. Khan, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants for quashing the order dated 06.08.2024 and proceeding of Complaint Case No.1690 of 2024, Vikram Rao vs. Mahesh Chandra Srivastava Proprietor R- cube Fire Protection Services, under Section 138 Negotiable Instrument Act, Police Station Gomti Nagar, District Lucknow.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the innocent applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that a misconceived and false case has been lodged against the applicant for the alleged dishonor of cheques that were never issued by the present applicant. He has drawn the attention of this Court to page numbers 20 and 21 of the instant application, and on the basis thereof, he submits that the alleged cheques were, in fact, issued by someone else and not by the applicant. Therefore, prosecuting the applicant on the basis of the said cheques amounts to a gross misuse of the process of the Court. He thus submits that the impugned order dated 06.08.2024 deserves to be quashed.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State has opposed the aforesaid prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant. However, he could not dispute the factual submission advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶10

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

¶11

Notice on behalf of the State has been accepted by learned A.G.A.

¶12

Issue notice to 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 thereafter shall be available to learned counsel for the applicants to file rejoinder affidavit.

¶16

List in the week commencing 10.02.2025.

¶17

Meanwhile, the impugned summoning order dated 06.08.2024 and any process issued, pursuant thereto, shall not be given effect to qua the present applicant only.

¶18

(Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I, J.)

¶19

Order Date :- 17.12.2024 A.Dewal

¶20

Digitally signed by :- ASHISH DEWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mahesh Chandra Srivastava v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahesh Chandra Srivastava 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

National Insurance Company Ltd. through the Manager Regional Vs Guljari Lal

Greeneffect Waste Management Ltd. Thru Authorized Signatory Yuvraj Sharma Vs Construction and Design Services (a Unit of U.P. Jal Nigam) Lucknow Thru Its Director and Anr.

Nand Lal (Deceased) Thru. 1.1. Harishchandra and 4 Others Vs Vijay Bahadur and Others

Ram Prasad vs United India Insurance Company Ltd., Faizabad Thru. Branch Manager and 2 Others

Phoolmati Chauhan and Others vs Union of India Represented by the General Manager, North Eastern Railway, Gorkhapur

Brijesh (Corpus) Thru. His Real Elder Brother and Next Friend Dharmendra vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and 7 Others