Dismissed

Yugdeep Estates Builders Promoters Pvy Ltd. v. Dd Township Ltd.

Delhi HC13 Aug 2024CRL.M.C./5465/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged order correcting clerical mistake in notice under Section 251 Cr.P.C. involving dishonoured cheques. Court noted 16-year delay and that evidence was correctly led based on right cheques. Petition dismissed; matter to proceed for final arguments.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed; pending applications disposed of as infructuous; matter proceeds for final arguments.

Yugdeep Estates Builders Promoters Pvy Ltd. Vs Dd Township Ltd. — Cheque Dishonour | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~69

¶2

*	IN THE HIGH COURT	OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+	CRL.M.C. 5465/2024CRL.M. YUGDEEP ESTATES BUIL	A. 20927/2024 DERS PROMOTERS PVY LTD .....Petitioner
	Through: versus	Mr. Mahavir Sharma, Advocate.
	DD TOWNSHIP LTD	.....Respondent
	Through: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A O R D E R	Mr. Shiv Chopra, Ms. Aadhyaa Khanna, Mr. Siddharth Arora and Mr. Akash Jindal, Advocate. NISH DAYAL
%	13.08.2024

¶3

This petition has been filed assailing the order dated 01^st July, 2024 passed by MM, Tis Hazari Courts (Central), Delhi in CC no. 536441/2016. By the said order, a clerical mistake in the notice under Section 251 Cr.P.C. framed on 16^th July, 2008, was corrected.

¶4

The cheques in question bear no. 514939, 514940 and 514941 all dated 30^th March, 2008.

¶5

While framing the notice, number of cheques were mentioned incorrectly as 514930, 514933 and 514934 dated 12^th June, 2007, 18^th June, 2007 and 09^th March, 2007, respectively.

¶6

These incorrectly mentioned cheques had been previously issued by the accused which were dishonoured, while correct cheque numbers were later issued against the liability.

¶7

This is a digitally signed order.

¶8

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/08/2024 at 11:41:05

¶9

It is recorded by the impugned order that the matter is at the stage of final arguments, and it has taken 16 years to reach this case, complaint being registered in 2008.

¶10

The examination of witnesses, the complainant as well as the accused has already been conducted on the basis of the correct cheque numbers and there was only a clerical mistake in recording, in the notice under Section 251 Cr.P.C.

¶11

The Court does not find any infirmity in the said order.

¶12

Besides, counsel for complainant/respondent also draws attention to the decision of the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Nitin Gupta v. Aakash Metal Industrial ., (2019) SCC online Del 10870, where this Court has observed that as per mandate Section 251 Cr.P.C. no formal notice is required to be framed, so long as the substance of the accusation is stated and the accused is asked whether he pleads guilty or intents to lead any defence evidence.

¶13

It is not disputed that all the evidence which has been led was relatable to the correct cheque numbers.

¶14

As regards the alternative prayer to re-examine the authorized representative of the complainant, one Sukhvinder Singh, it is noted that this plea had been taken up earlier and had already been declined by the ASJ, by order dated 28^th April, 2023, which has been handed up in Court.

¶15

It is only appropriate that the matter proceeds for final arguments, 16 years having elapsed.

¶16

Petition is, therefore, dismissed. Pending applications (if any) are disposed of as infructuous.

¶17

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/08/2024 at 11:41:05

¶18

The date already fixed is cancelled.

¶19

Order be uploaded on the website of this Court.

¶20

ANISH DAYAL, J

¶21

AUGUST 13, 2024/RK

¶22

This is a digitally signed order.

¶23

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

¶24

The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/08/2024 at 11:41:05

Yugdeep Estates Builders Promoters Pvy Ltd. v. Dd Township Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yugdeep Estates Builders Promoters Pvy Ltd. v. Dd Township Ltd.

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

Similar cases

Mukul Gautam Vs State (the NCT of Delhi) and Anr.

Sourav Grewal Vs State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Smt Manju Rani Vs State Govt of NCT of Delhi through Secretary of State

Ashish Child in Conflict With Law Vs State Gnct of Delhi & Anr.

Manoj Kumar & Ors. Vs the State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Jaykant Kumar Jha Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi