Dismissed

Shabbu Khan v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC10 Dec 2024A482/41330/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant sought quashing of proceedings under Section 138 NI Act, arguing the complainant failed to provide evidence regarding the transaction. The Court held that mere assertion in the complaint and statement under Section 200 Cr.P.C is sufficient at the summoning stage. Defences regarding the purpose of the cheque are raised during trial. Application dismissed.

What the court decided

AI extract

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:193081

¶2

Court No. - 79

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 41330 of 2024 Applicant :- Shabbu Khan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Jitendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Jitendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Brijesh Kr. Dwivedi, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

The instant application has been filed seeking quashing of the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 24100 of 2023 ( Deepak Kumar Maurya vs. Shabbu Khan ), under Section 138 N.I. Act, P.S. Kotwali Dehat, District Bijnor and the summoning order dated 5.6.2024.

¶7

Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the complainant has not given any evidence regarding transaction of money regarding which the cheque in question was issued.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. states that at the time of summoning under Section 138 N.I. Act, the court should see whether the conditions under Section 138 N.I. Act are fulfilled or not. Therefore, there is no illegality in the impugned proceeding.

¶9

After hearing the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record, it appears that the cheque in question was dishonoured and returned to the complaint on 9.8.2023. Thereafter, a demand notice was sent to the applicant through registered post on 26.8.2023. However, despite expiry of 15 days from the date of service of notice, the cheque amount was not paid. For the purpose of summoning the accused under Section 138 N.I. Act, mere assertion in the complaint as well as statement under Section 200 Cr.P.C that certain amount was given to the accused as a loan and in discharge of that liability, cheque in question was issued, is sufficient.

¶10

However, the plea of the applicant that the cheque in question was not issued in discharge of any liability and the complainant has not mentioned how and for what purpose the amount has been given by him to the applicant is his defence which can be raised during trial, but the impugned proceeding cannot be quashed on that basis.

¶11

Accordingly, the application is dismissed .

¶12

Order Date :- 10.12.2024

¶13

Vandana

¶14

Digitally signed by :- VANDANA GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shabbu Khan v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Shabbu Khan v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Aditya Prasad Patel vs State of Up and Another

Naseema Khatun and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt Sonam vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Ram Pratap Rajbhar and 6 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Narayan Singh and 5 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Prem Nath Vishvakarma and Another vs State of U.P. and Another