Dismissed

Ramji Soni v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC4 Jul 2024A482/16016/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicant sought to quash summons order in a cheque bounce case, relying on a receipt claiming full payment. The court held the receipt was unproved and the presumption under Section 139 NI Act requires rebuttal only during trial, dismissing the application.

What did the court decide?

Application seeking quashing of proceedings was dismissed.

Ramji Soni vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:133951

¶2

(Sl.No.16)

¶3

Court No. - 79

¶4

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 16016 of 2024

¶5

Applicant :- Ramji Soni Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Hridai Narayan Sharma,Keshav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J.

¶7

Heard Sri Hridai Narayan Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Uday Bhan, learned AGA for the State.

¶8

This application u/S 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant seeking quashing of the summoning order dated 3.1.2022 passed in Case No.5278 of 2020 (Brijmohan vs. Ramji Soni) pending before Civil Judge (JD/JM) Court No.2, Jhansi.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant relying upon a receipt, which has been annexed as Annexure-1 to the instant application submits that the entire cheque amount has already been paid to the opposite party No.2, therefore, there is no liability on the part of the applicant towards the opposite party No.2. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the legal notice was also properly replied and wherein it was categorically stated that the entire payment has been made. Therefore, he disputes the liability and seeks quashing of the entire proceedings of the instant case.

¶10

Per contra, learned AGA submits that as per the averment made in the complaint, prima facie a case has been made out against the applicant herein and specifically in view of the Section 139 of the N.I. Act, whereby it shall be presumed that the said cheque was issued by the applicant against the legal liability existing on the date of issuance of cheque. However, such presumption is a rebuttable presumption. The applicant may rebut the said presumption during the trial of the case. The receipt which has been annexed as Annexure-1 to this application is an unproved document and the same cannot be relied upon for quashing of the proceeding at this stage. Therefore, learned AGA submits that no interference is called for in the instant application.

¶11

Having heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel

¶12

for the parties, this Court has carefully gone through the record of the case and from the record of the case, it is apparent that the opposite party No.2 has advanced a sum of Rs.3,20,000/- to the applicant herein and in repayment thereof, the applicant has issued three cheques, which were presented for encashment and dishonoured for the reason 'insufficient fund'. Thereafter, legal demand notice was sent and the complaint was filed on 18.10.2019.

¶13

From the averments as made in the complaint, prima facie a case has been made out against the applicant herein, however, the applicant has disputed the liability, which is his defence required to be proved before the trial court to rebut the presumption under Section 139 of the N.I. Act.

¶14

Therefore, this Court does not find any good reason to entertain the instant application and quash the proceedings merely on the basis of the unproved documents, which has been placed by the applicant herein as Annexure-1 to the instant application. However, the same is required to be proved before the trial court.

¶15

In view thereof, the instant application lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶16

Order Date :- 21.8.2024 LN Tripathi

¶17

(Anish Kumar Gupta,J.)

¶18

Digitally signed by :- LALIT TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ramji Soni v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramji Soni 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ravindra and Anothers vs State of Up and Another

M/S Kgn Inter Prizes Prof Samsa Khatoon vs State of U.P. and Another

Anamika Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Saif Salim Khan vs State of Up and 3 Others

Pankaj Kumar and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Indarpal vs State of U.P. and Another