Disposed

Ashish Bhadauriya v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC25 Oct 2024A482/9535/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court considered an application under Section 482 CrPC to quash a charge-sheet and summoning order in a cheque-bounce dispute. The applicant alleged retaliation and habitual litigation by the complainant. The court examined submissions and directed the matter to be listed for judicial inquiry where parties must appear in person.

What did the court decide?

No coercive steps against applicant till next hearing date; case listed for personal appearance of applicant and complainant.

Ashish Bhadauriya vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 13

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9535 of 2024 Applicant :- Ashish Bhadauriya Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home, Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashwani Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Abhishek Dwivedi,Ambrish Kumar Dwivedi

¶3

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶4

Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

Present application has been filed with the prayer to quash the charge-sheet dated 09.08.2023 in Case Crime No.37/2023 under Sections 420, 406, 504, 506 IPC, P.S.- KotwaliSatrikh, District- Barabanki as well as summoning order dated 15.02.2024 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.16, Barabanki in Criminal Case No.548 of 2024.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the amount in question was not being returned by the complainant, thereafter, a cheque was given by him which was dishonored. Then the notice was given under the provisions of Negotiable Instruments Act, thereafter, in retaliation, FIR of case in question was lodged by the complainant on the basis of concocted facts. He further submitted that the Investigating Officer also failed to consider the evidences provided by the applicant in accordance with the Section 107 of UP Police Regulations and submitted chargesheet.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant drew attention of this Court on the supplementary affidavit filed today and submitted that complainant is habitual in lodging such type of cases, as earlier, one FIR bearing No.168 of 2018 under Sections 419, 420, 406, 504, 506 IPC, P.S.- Satarekh, District-

¶9

Barabanki was also lodged by the complainant against some other persons. In support of his submission, he also relied on the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal reported in 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426 and requested for kind indulgence of this Court.

¶10

Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed the prayer of applicant and submitted that after detailed investigation, charge sheet has been submitted, therefore, no inference of this Court is necessary in the present case.

¶11

Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, going through the contents of application, contents of supplementary affidavit as well as other relevant documents, it is evident that the notice was given by the applicant, thereafter, the FIR was lodged. In such circumstances, matter requires consideration.

¶12

8. List this case on 25.11.2024 along with Application U/S 482 No.506/2022; Basant Singh and Anr. Vs. State of UP and Anr.

¶13

On the next date, applicant as well as complainant of the case in question shall appear in person before this Court.

¶14

No coercive steps shall be taken against the applicant till the next date of listing.

¶15

Order Date :- 5.11.2024 V. Sinha

¶16

Digitally signed by :- VAISHALI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ashish Bhadauriya v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashish Bhadauriya v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. of 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

Ram Gulam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others

Rahul Gautam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and Another

Bhaggal Alias Rupesh Kumar Tiwari and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Mrs. Nausawa Rana vs Monika Rani, District Magistrate Bahraich

Shubham Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Vijay Dev vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another