Dismissed

Mrs Archana Saluja v. Mrs Sudha Chadha

Delhi HC29 Aug 2024CRL.M.C./6771/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order dismisses a petition under Section 482 CrPC filed to quash the summoning order in a cheque bounce case. The court found no merit in the petition, citing inordinate delay and the availability of an alternative remedy. A separate application for exemption was allowed with just exceptions.

What did the court decide?

The petition under Section 482 CrPC was dismissed; the pending exemption application was allowed subject to exceptions; all applications disposed of.

Mrs Archana Saluja Vs Mrs Sudha Chadha — Cheque Dishonour | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~72

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 6771/2024, CRL.M.A. 25837/2024 (stay)

¶4

MRS ARCHANA SALUJA .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Counsel for petitioner (appearance not given)

¶6

versus

¶7

MRS SUDHA CHADHA .....Respondent Through: Mr. Mudit Gupta and Mr. Sidhant Kumar, Advocates.

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA

¶9

O R D E R % 29.08.2024

¶10

CRL.M.A.25838/2024 (Exemption)

¶11

Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶12

The applications stand disposed of.

¶13

CRL.M.C. 6771/2024 (under Section 482 of CrPC filed by the petitioner for quashing of Order dated 06.07.2022 in Complaint Case No. 4990/2022)

¶14

The Petition under Section 482 of CrPC has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for quashing of the summoning Order dated 06.07.2022 whereby the petitioner has been summoned in Complaint Case No. 4990/2022 under Section 138 of N.I. Act, 1881.

¶15

Mr. Mudit Gupta, learned counsel for the respondent, who has appeared on advance notice, submits that the petitioner along with the other accused summoned vide Order dated 06.07.2022. The entire trial has been

¶16

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 03/09/2024 at 11:50:04

¶17

completed and the final arguments have also been addressed on behalf of the respondent/complainant and the matter is listed today for arguments of the petitioner.

¶18

The present Petition is, therefore, opposed by learned counsel for the respondent.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that she has filed the present Petition and she has been engaged only in the month of June and thereafter, because of personal difficulty, shows unable to file the present Petition earlier.

¶20

Submissions heard.

¶21

By way of the present Petition, summoning Order dated 06.07.2022 against the petitioner for the offence under Section 138 of N.I. Act passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, has been challenged. There was an alternative remedy of challenging it before the learned ASJ and also there has been an inordinate delay in filing the present Petition. The case is now at the stage of final arguments.

¶22

No merit in the present Petition which is hereby dismissed. The pending application also stands disposed of.

¶23

NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J

¶24

AUGUST 29, 2024/RS

¶25

This is a digitally signed order.

¶26

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 03/09/2024 at 11:50:04

Mrs Archana Saluja v. Mrs Sudha Chadha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs Archana Saluja v. Mrs Sudha Chadha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Amit Saini Vs Jai Prakash Mittal

Qadir Ahmed Vs Government of NCT Delhi

Dheeraj Valecha & Ors. Vs the State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Ajay Kumar Vs the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Pankaj Sharma Vs State NCT of Dehli

Himanshu Kumar & Ors. Vs State (Nct of Delhi) & Anr.