Dismissed

Rakesh Upadhyay v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC24 Sept 2024A482/23468/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The case involves an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of a summoning order and a revisional order in a complaint under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. The applicant argued liability was for Rs. 70,000 but the cheque was drawn for Rs. 5,00,000. The Court dismissed the application finding a prima facie case and applying Section 139.

What did the court decide?

The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of the summoning order and the revisional order was dismissed.

Rakesh Upadhyay vs State of U.P. and Another — Money Laundering | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:157299

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

*********

(Sl.No. 41)

Court No. - 79

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 23468 of 2024

¶7

Applicant :- Rakesh Upadhyay Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Pandey,Prakash Chandra Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶8

Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J.

¶9

Heard Sri Atul Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Prashant Saxena, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶10

The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking quashing of the order dated 07.02.2024 passed in Criminal Revision no. 215 of 2023 (Rakesh Upadhay vs. State of U.P. and another) as well as summoning order dated 08.06.2022 passed in Complaint Case No. 4905 of 2022 (Manoj Kumar Gupta vs. Rakesh Upadhyay) under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (in short 'the N.I. Act'), Police StationKaptanganj, District-Kushinagar.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there was only liability of Rs. 70,000/- on the applicant towards the opposite party no.2 in discharge of which a blank cheque was issued by the applicant to the opposite party no.2, which has been wrongly filled up by the opposite party no.2 as Rs. 5,00,000/- and the instant complaint case has been filed. The trial court has summoned the applicant vide order dated 08.06.2022 on the basis of averments made in the complaint. Against the aforesaid order dated 08.06.2022, criminal revision no. 215 of 2023 was filed by the applicant, which was also rejected vide order dated 07.02.2024.

¶12

This Court has carefully perused the record of the case and as per the complaint, it is apparent that the applicant has taken a loan of Rs. 5,00,000/- from the opposite party no. 2 and in discharge of the aforesaid, a cheque of Rs. 5,00,000/- was issued by the

¶13

applicant on 15.01.2022 which was presented for encashment and the same was dishonored on 17.2.2022 for the reason 'funds insufficient'. Thereafter, a legal demand notice was issued by the opposite party no.2, since the same was not complied with, the instant complaint case was filed by the opposite party no. 2 on 18.04.2022. Thereupon, the trial court being satisfied with the complaint case on the basis of the material available on record has summoned the applicant. The said summoning order was challenged in criminal revision which has also been dismissed by the court below vide impugned order dated 07.02.2024.

¶14

Since from the record of the case and the averments made in the complaint, a prima facie case has been made out against the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant has disputed the liability, however in view of Section 139 of the N.I. Act, once the issuance of cheque is not denied by the applicant, it shall be presumed that the cheque in question was issued in discharge of his liability. However, it is open for the applicant to rebut the said presumption by leading cogent evidence before the trial court to establish that there was no liability on the part of the applicant. In view thereof, this Court does not find illegality in the summoning order dated 08.06.2022 as well as the order dated 07.02.2024.

¶15

For reasons aforesaid, the instant application lacks merit and is accordingly, dismissed

¶16

Order Date :- 24.9.2024 Kirti

¶17

(Anish Kumar Gupta, J.)

¶18

Digitally signed by :- SMT KIRTI MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rakesh Upadhyay v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh Upadhyay 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

Ajay Sonkar and 6 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Ramteras @ Teras and 5 Others vs State of Up and Another

Sudhir Kumar Singh vs Commissioner Devi Patan Mandal Gonda and 4 Others

Rajesh Jain vs State of U.P. and Another

Pradeep Kumar Bhardwaj vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ram Avtar Agarwal vs State of U.P. and Another