Mahmood Ali vs Ms Hari Babau Santosh Kumar

Court No. - 48

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 14685 of 2025

Applicant :- Mahmood Ali Opposite Party :- Ms Hari Babau Santosh Kumar Counsel for Applicant :- A Kumar Srivastava,Manish Kumar

¶4

Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J.

¶5

Heard Shri A.Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant.

¶6

Present application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed by the applicant, assailing the order dated 10.07.2024, passed by Civil Judge Junior Division/Judicial Magistrate, Jalaun, District-Jalaun, as well as non bailable warrant dated 04.01.2025 issued against the applicant in Criminal Complaint Case No. 2044/2023, under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, Police Station-Kotwali, District-Jalaun.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the complaint case was initiated against the applicant by the opposite party for alleged default in payment of Rs. 5,70,000/- (Five Lakh Seventy Thousand). He further submits that the applicant has made payment of Rs. 5,59,000/- (Five Lakh Fifty Nine Thousand) by way of receipts on different dates from 20.10.2022 up to 19.11.2022, details of which have been given in paragraph no. 5 of the affidavit filed in support of the application. Further more Rupees fifty thousand in cash and Rupees ten thousand online, have been paid to Mohd. Imran, the complainant. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that in view of the aforesaid the entire payment has been made to the complainant and hence the complaint case ought not to be proceeded with and the opposite party without disclosing the fact that the payment have been received has impressed upon the judicial magistrate Jalaun in issuing the non bailable warrant against the applicant.

¶8

I have heard learned counsel for the applicant and have perused the records.

¶9

Payments to the tune of Rupees Five Lakh Fifty Nine Thousand, as detailed in paragraph no. 5 of the affidavit filed in support of the application have been duly established by filing receipts thereof and so far as the additional payment of Rupees Sixty Thousand (Fifty Thousand by cash and ten thousand online) the receipts have not been shown and the said facts needs to be clarified.

¶10

In the opinion of the Court since substantial payment towards the dues as alleged to the tune of Rupees Five Lakh Fifty Nine Thousands have been paid by the applicant, the applicant is entitled for interim protection.

¶11

Accordingly, issue notice to the opposite party returnable within a month. The opposite party, if so advised, may file counter affidavit within the said period. One week thereafter is granted to the learned counsel for the applicant to file rejoinder affidavit.

¶12

List this case, on 16th July, 2025.

¶13

Meanwhile, considering the submissions advanced, till the next date of listing, the effect and operation of the order dated 10.07.2024, passed by Civil Judge Junior Division/Judicial Magistrate, Jalaun, District-Jalaun, as well as non bailable warrant dated 04.01.2025 issued against the applicant in Criminal Complaint Case No. 2044/2023, under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, Police Station-Kotwali, District-Jalaun, shall remain in abeyance.

¶14

Order Date :- 10.6.2025 Deepak/

¶15

Digitally signed by :- DEEPAK KUMAR KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mahmood Ali v. Ms Hari Babau Santosh Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahmood Ali v. Ms Hari Babau Santosh Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chhote Lal vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Kanhiya Lal and 7 Others vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Devesh Kumar Mishra vs State of Uttar Pradesh and 4 Others

Pankaj @ Mintu vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Niwas and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Anita vs State of U.P. and 2 Others