Amit Pandey Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy… — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2025)

Amit Pandey Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy… — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim relief only: stay placed on the operation of the impugned order dated 29.01.2016, the non-bailable warrant dated 21.07.2023 and the proceedings of Complaint Case No. 2859/2015 (S.138 NI Act); notice issued to respondent no. 2 with joint appearance fixed for 21.04.2025; petitioner directed to deposit 6% per annum interest on the cheque amount calculated from 2015 within eight weeks. Final disposition pending.

Issue for consideration

Whether the criminal proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (Complaint Case No. 2859/2015) may be settled/quashed where the applicant claims to have adequately compensated the complainant, even in the absence of the complainant's consent, with payment of 6% per annum interest for the delayed period.

Court's answer

Notice is to be issued to respondent no. 2, and both the petitioner and respondent no. 2 shall appear before this Court on 21.04.2025, the date on which the case is listed.

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner is directed to deposit, before this Court within eight weeks, the interest amount at the rate of 6% per annum on the cheque amount calculated from 2015, as undertaken by his learned counsel.

Key takeaways

In the meantime, the operation of the impugned order dated 29.01.2016, the non-bailable warrant dated 21.07.2023, and the proceedings of Complaint Case No. 2859/2015 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, P.S. Wazirganj, District Lucknow, shall remain stayed.ratio¶14

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Interim order dated 18.2.2025 by Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar, J., High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench (Court No. 16), on Application U/S 482 No. 1521 of 2025 filed by Amit Pandey concerning proceedings of Complaint Case No. 2859/2015 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (dishonoured cheque of Rs. 4,00,000/-; P.S. Wazirganj, District Lucknow). Counsel submitted that the petitioner, pursuant to a verbal agreement, had already repaid Rs. 4,03,000/- and relied on Raj Reddy Kallem v. The State of Haryana & Others, Criminal Appeal No. 2210 of 2024 (Supreme Court), contending that proceedings under Section 138 may be quashed upon adequate compensation of the complainant even without the complainant's consent, with an undertaking to pay 6% per annum interest for the delayed payment dating back to 2015. The Court issued notice to respondent no. 2, fixed appearance of both parties on 21.04.2025, required the petitioner to deposit interest at 6% per annum on the cheque amount calculated from 2015 before the Court within eight weeks, and meanwhile stayed the operation of the impugned order dated 29.01.2016, the non-bailable warrant dated 21.07.2023, and the complaint proceedings.

Court No. - 16 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1521 of 2025 Applicant :- Amit Pandey

Opposite Party :- The State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. And Another

Counsel for Applicant :- Samrat Gupta,Nikhil Dixit Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had issued a cheque for Rs. 4,00,000/- in favour of the complainant, which was dishonored. As a result, a complaint was filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

It is further submitted on behalf of the petitioner that pursuant to a verbal agreement, he agreed to repay the amount of ₹4,00,000/- to the complainant. Accordingly, he has already made a payment of 4,03,000/-, details of which are mentioned₹ in paragraphs 16 to 19 of the petition.

In support of his submissions, the learned counsel for the petitioner relies on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Raj Reddy Kallem v. The State of Haryana & Others, Criminal Appeal No. 2210 of 2024 . In this case, the Apex Court opined that the compensatory aspect of the remedy should be prioritized over the punitive aspect.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that even in the absence of the complainant’s consent, the Court has the discretion to quash the criminal proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act if the accused has adequately compensated the complainant. The petitioner also expresses willingness to pay an additional 6% interest per annum for the delayed payment of the last ten years, provided respondent no.

2 is willing to settle the matter.

In view of the above, let a notice be issued to respondent no. 2.

List this case on 21.04.2025. On that date, both the petitioner and respondent no. 2 shall appear before this Court.

The petitioner shall deposit the interest amount at the rate of 6% per annum of the cheque amount calculated from 2015, before this Court within eight weeks from today, as undertaken by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

In the meantime, the operation of the impugned order dated 29.01.2016, the non-bailable warrant dated 21.07.2023, and the proceedings of Complaint Case No. 2859/2015, under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, P.S. Wazirganj, District Lucknow, shall remain stayed.

Order Date :- 18.2.2025 R.C.

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