Allowed

Manav Kalra v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC5 Aug 2024A482/7966/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing a Section 138 NI Act summons. The cheque was issued from an account belonging to a third party (Vishnu s/o Gurubaks), not the applicant, rendering the prosecution against the applicant unsustainable.

What did the court decide?

The summoning order dated 09.02.2024 in Complaint No. 27133 of 2023, under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, P.S.- Trans Yamuna, District- Agra, was quashed.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:128563

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

(Sl No.1)

Court No. - 79

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7966 of 2024

¶7

Applicant :- Manav Kalra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Aditi Srivastava,Kandarp Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶8

Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J.

¶9

1. In pursuance of the order dated 05.08.2024, Sri Ankit Saran, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 is present and has filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of the Bank. He has also submitted the account details of the account in question wherefrom the cheque was issued and stated that the said account belongs to one Vishnu s/o Gurubaks.

¶10

2. Heard Kandarp Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ankit Saran, learned counsel for the opposite party, Punjab National Bank, Nagaur and Sri Rajiv Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶11

3. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking quashing of the summoning order dated 09.02.2024 in Complaint No. 27133 of 2023 (Manoj Kumar vs. Manav Kalra) under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (in short, ' the N.I. Act '), P.S.- Trans Yamuna, District- Agra, pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 8, Agra.

¶12

4. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that from the perusal of the cheque in question itself it is clear that this cheque belongs to the account of one Vishnu s/o Gurubaks and not that of the applicant herein. However, in the said cheque the signatures of the applicant has been shown in the cheque. Since, the account does not belongs to the applicant herein, no liability under Section 138 of the N.I. Act can be fixed upon the applicant, who is otherwise having no relation whatsoever with the opposite party no.2.

¶13

5. Despite service of notice on the opposite party no.2 none has put in appearance on behalf of the opposite party no.2. On the order passed by this Court, Sri Ankit Saran, Advocate has appeared on behalf of the Punjab National Bank and has categorically stated that the account numbers of the cheque in question belongs to Vishnu s/o Gurubaks not Manav Kalra and with regard to the dishonour of cheque for the reasons "insufficient fund ", it was clarified on earlier dates also that the cheque being presented for clearance of the Automated Computerized Clearance System and once the fund is not available the cheque is dishonoured only for the reason "fund insufficient" . If the funds are available then the other things are being checked by the Automated System. Therefore, in the instant case the funds were found insufficient, therefore, no further query is made by Automated System and the cheque was dishonoured.

¶14

6. Since, the account in question does not belong to the applicant herein and merely by putting the signature in the name of the applicant on the cheque belonging to some other person, no offence u/S 138 of the N.I. Act could be said to be attracted. Therefore, the instant complaint case filed by the opposite party no.2 is nothing but a malicious prosecution and is not sustainable in law.

¶15

7. In view thereof, the instant application is allowed and the entire proceedings summoning order dated 09.02.2024 in Complaint No. 27133 of 2023 (Manoj Kumar vs. Manav Kalra) under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (in short, ' the N.I. Act '), P.S.- Trans Yamuna, District- Agra, pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 8, Agra, are hereby quashed .

¶16

Order Date :- 8.8.2024 Shubham Arya

¶17

(Anish Kumar Gupta, J.)

¶18

Digitally signed by :- SHUBHAM ARYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Manav Kalra v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manav Kalra 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

Navneet Kumar Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Dharmendra Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Chhote Lal Vishwakarma vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Mohammad Shoaib Ali @ Danish Ali vs State of Up and Another

Smt Prema Devi vs State of U.P. 5 Others

Amit Kumar Srivastava vs State of Up and Another