Dismissed¶12

Bharat Sharma v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC23 Apr 2025NA528/42022/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing application under S.528 BNSS against S.138 N.I. Act complaint (cheque dishonour) - trial at S.313 CrPC examination stage - applicant summoned 21.01.2017 - no jurisdictional error alleged - judicial intervention declined at advanced stage - application rejected - Bharat Sharma v. State of U.P. - Allahabad High Court - Vikas Budhwar, J. - Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:60831 - Order Date 23.4.2025.

What did the court decide?

In absence of any jurisdictional error committed by the court below, it would not be appropriate for the Court to interfere at this juncture, the applicant having been summoned on 21.01.2017 and the stage of trial being referable to Section 313 CrPC. ¶11

Bharat Sharma vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:60831

¶2

Court No. - 73

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 42022 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Bharat Sharma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mukesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Basudev (AoR No.A/B 0454/2013) holding brief of Sri Mukesh Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vikas Sharma, learned State Law Officer.

¶7

This is an application under Section 528 of BNSS preferred by the applicant for quashing the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 2319 of 2014, Chitra Singh Vs. Bharat Sharma , under section 138 of N.I. Act, Police Station: Jagdishpura, District: Agra pending before Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 10, Agra.

¶8

3.Learned counsel for the applicant submits that with relation to the dishonouring of the cheques, proceedings were initiated by the O.P. No.2 under Section 138 of N.I. Act. Thereafter the said complaint was rejected against which a revision was preferred and the matter was remitted back for passing fresh order. Thereafter, applicant has been summoned on 21.01.2017. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicants have not committed any criminality and no offences under Section 138 is made out.

¶9

Learned State Law Officer on the other hand has invited attention of this Court towards page-65 of the paper-book beint order sheet dated 20.04.2024, 17.09.2024 and 27.09.2024 wherein the stage whereat the trial was on the said date, was under Section 313 CrPC. He submits that the present application has been preferred after a lapse of eight years.

¶10

Having heard the submissions so made across the Bar, the sole question which arises for determination is the extent of judicial intervention at this stage. Apparently, the applicant has been summoned on 21.01.2017 and as per the date so noted above, the stage of trial is referable to Section 313 CrPC. Thus even otherwise in absence of any jurisdictional error committed by the

¶11

court below it would not be appropriate for the Court to interfere at this juncture.

¶12

The application is accordingly rejected .

¶13

Order Date :- 23.4.2025 N.S.Rathour

¶14

(Vikas Budhwar, J)

¶15

Digitally signed by :- NIPENDRA SINGH RATHOUR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Bharat Sharma v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bharat Sharma v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Mohdusman vs State of U.P. and Another

Vikash Paswan vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohd Usman vs State of Up and Another

Vikash Paswan vs State of U.P. and Another

Meenu Bisht vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohd Muzayyn vs State of U.P. and Another