Disposed

Mansoor Alam Khan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.N Home Lko and Another

Allahabad HC25 Jun 2024A482/5727/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the High Court stayed the criminal proceedings under Section 138 NI Act pending the filing of counter affidavits by respondents, noting the applicant's contention that the mandatory notice of demand details were absent from the court records.

What did the court decide?

Stay of criminal proceedings against the applicant until the opposite parties file their counter affidavits.

Mansoor Alam Khan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.N… — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 12

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5727 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Mansoor Alam Khan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.N Home Lko And Another Counsel for Applicant :- M.K. Dixit Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Mayank Sinha, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶6

Instant application has been filed with the prayer to quash the impugned cognizance & summoning order dated 21.10.2021, rejection of maintainability order dated 17.10.2023, passed by the learned trial court as well as revisional order dated 20.3.2024 passed by the learned District Judge Barabanki, in applicant's revision no.203/2023, dismissing the revision, including entire criminal proceedings of Complaint Case No.670/2022 (Rita Singh Vs. Mansoor Alam Khan), under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Barabanki, now transferred and pending in court of Additional Civil Judge (S.D.)/A.C.J.M. Court No.48, Barabanki. Further prayer is to direct the trial court not to adopt any coercive action against the petitioner, in pursuance of the impugned summoning order dated 21.10.2021, passed in Complaint Case No.670 of 2022 (Rita Singh Vs. Mansoor Alam Khan) under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, Police Station-Kotwali Nagar, District Barabanki.

¶7

Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that from the perusal of the complaint, it is evident that date of service of the mandatory notice is not mentioned which is against the settled proposition of law. He next added that so far as the statement under Section 200 and 202 of Cr.P.C. is concerned, it is incumbent upon the Magistrate to make a query to the complainant with respect to the service of notice and same is not apparent from the statement recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. He further added that the issue has already been settled by the Apex Court in the case of Shakti Travel & Tours Vs. State of Bihar and another, (2002) 9 SCC 415, and subsequently it has been settled in the case of Suo Motu Writ Petition (Crl.) No.2 of 2020 wherein in paragraph 24, it is specifically held that " Inquiry shall be conducted on receipt of complaints under Section 138 of the Act to arrive at sufficient grounds to proceed

¶8

against the accused, when such accused resides beyond the territorial jurisdiction of the court."

¶9

He further added that proceeding initiated on the complaint instituted by the opposite party no.2 is fully erroneous and against the settled proposition of law and, as such, the same is liable to be quashed.

¶10

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. for the State submits that there is no erroneousness in the proceedings initiated under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the applicant, thus, the application is liable to be dismissed.

¶11

Matter requires consideration.

¶12

Let notice be issued to the respondent no.2 returnable at an early date.

¶13

Steps be taken within one week.

¶14

List/put up this matter in the week commencing 5.8.2024.

¶15

In the meantime, the opposite parties may file their counter affidavits.

¶16

Till then, criminal proceedings of Complaint Case No. 670 of 2022 shall remain stayed so far as it relates to the present applicant.

¶17

Order Date :- 25.6.2024 Ram Murti

¶18

Digitally signed by :- RAM MURTI YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mansoor Alam Khan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.N Home Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mansoor Alam Khan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.N 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Choge @ Ram Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko. and Another

Smt. Nalini Jain vs State of U.P. Thru. Addil. Chief Secy. Home Govt. Lko. and Another

Divya Bajpai Alias Divya Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Manju Devi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Ajay Kumar Srivastava vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Guru Prasad and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and Another