Dismissed¶13

P.T.C. Techno Private Limited v. State of U.P. and 7 Others

Allahabad HC6 May 2025A482/2443/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 482 Cr.P.C. application dismissed; challenge to Trial Court order dated 04.09.2024 rejecting summons for documents of arbitration proceedings sought during Section 202 Cr.P.C. stage of Complaint Case No. 5415 of 2018, PS Phase-2, Gautam Buddh Nagar; documents not shown relevant or necessary; reasoned order of Magistrate upheld; no abuse of process or miscarriage of justice; P.T.C. Techno Private Limited v. State of U.P. & 7 Others; Allahabad High Court, Raj Beer Singh, J.; Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:72599; decided 6.5.2025.

What did the court decide?

There is nothing on record to indicate how the documents sought from the arbitration proceedings are relevant and necessary for disposal of the complaint case. ¶12

P.T.C. Techno Private Limited vs State of U.P. and 7 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶13

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 04.09.2024 of the Trial Court rejecting the applicant's application for summoning documents of the arbitration proceedings is liable to be set aside under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶8

Court's answer

There is nothing on record to indicate how the documents sought from the arbitration proceedings are relevant and necessary for disposal of the complaint case.

¶12

Ratio / Principle

If the applicant has any grievance regarding the arbitral proceedings, it may resort to appropriate proceedings available under law.

¶12

Key takeaways

The Learned Magistrate considered the facts of the matter and rejected the applicant company's application by a reasoned order.ratio¶12
Nothing shows any abuse of the process of Court or miscarriage of justice resulting from the impugned order so as to require interference by invoking extraordinary powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.ratio¶12
The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Raj Beer Singh, J.), by order dated 6.5.2025, dismissed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging the order dated 04.09.2024 of the Civil Judge (S.D.)-F.T.C./Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gautam Buddh Nagar, in Complaint Case No. 5415 of 2018 (PS Phase-2), whereby the applicant company's application for summoning certain documents of arbitration proceedings pending between the parties was rejected while the complaint was still at the Section 202 Cr.P.C. stage. Held: nothing on record indicated that the said documents were relevant or necessary for disposal of the complaint case; any grievance regarding the arbitral proceedings could be pursued through appropriate proceedings available under law; the Magistrate had rejected the application by a reasoned order; and no abuse of the process of Court or miscarriage of justice was shown warranting interference through the extraordinary powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:72599

¶2

Court No. - 71

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2443 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- P.T.C. Techno Private Limited Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 7 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar,Harish Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record.

¶7

This application under Section - 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred against order dated 04.09.2024, passed by learned Civil Judge (S.D.)-F.T.C. / Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gautam Buddh Nagar, in Complaint Case No. 5415 of 2018, Police Station - Phase-2, District Gautam Buddh Nagar, whereby the application filed by applicant company for summoning certain documents has been rejected.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that impugned order is against facts and law and thus, liable to be set aside. It was submitted that while the complaint filed by the applicant company was at the stage of Section - 202 Cr.P.C., the applicant has filed an application before the Trial court for summoning of certain documents of the arbitration proceedings pending between the parties. The said application has been rejected by the learned Trial court merely on the ground that applicant has not clarified as to how those documents are relevant and necessary for the complaint case. It was submitted that relevancy and necessity of the documents can be examined during trial. The said application has been rejected by the learned Trial court in an arbitrary manner. Referring to facts of the matter, it was submitted that impugned order is liable to be

¶9

set aside.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and submitted that there is no illegality or perversity in the impugned order.

¶11

I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record.

¶12

It appears from record that applicant has filed the aforesaid complaint case against opposite party no.2 to 8 making several allegations. While the said complaint was pending at the stage of Section - 202 Cr.P.C., applicant has filed above referred application for summoning of certain documents of the arbitration proceedings. There is nothing to indicate that how the said documents are relevant and necessary for disposal of the complaint case. If the applicant has any grievance regarding arbitral proceedings, he can resort appropriate proceedings available under law. Learned Magistrate has considered facts of the matter and application of the applicant company was rejected by a reasoned order. There is nothing to show that there has been any abuse of the process of Court or the impugned order has resulted into miscarriage of justice, so as to require any interference by this Court by invoking extraordinary powers under Section - 482 Cr.P.C. The application under Section - 482 Cr.P.C. lacks merit and thus liable to be dismissed.

¶13

Accordingly, the application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is hereby dismissed .

¶14

Order Date :- 6.5.2025 S Rawat

¶15

Digitally signed by :- SHOBHIT RAWAT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

P.T.C. Techno Private Limited v. State of U.P. and 7 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.T.C. Techno Private Limited v. State of U.P. and 7 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Nisha Gond vs State of U.P. and Another

Nooruddin vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shubham and 9 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajesh Alias Jhagru Rajbhar vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajendra Singh and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Devkinandan and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another