The Patna High Court dismissed an application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the order of a Judicial Magistrate that framed a charge against the petitioner for offences under Sections 138 NI Act and 406 IPC. The Court held there was sufficient material on record.
Application dismissed; trial proceedings directed to proceed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.51362 of 2014
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -86 Year- 2012 Thana -JEHANABAD COMPLAINT CASE DistrictJEHANABAD
===========================================================
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
.... .... Opposite Party/s =========================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar-2, APP
=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 08-12-2017
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned
APP for the State.
This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed for quashing the order dated 18.09.2014 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Jehanabad in Complaint Case No. 86 of 2012 by which the learned Magistrate after holding enquiry has found prima facie case against the petitioner for the offence under Section 245 of the Cr.P.C.
The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner issued cheque in favour of the complainant, which got bounced due to insufficient amount. The cognizance was taken against the petitioner
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.51362 of 2014 dt.08-12-2017
2/2
for the offence under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. A petition under Section 245 Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioner for discharge, was dismissed on the ground that the sufficient material is available on record to frame charge in this case. The court below has mentioned in the impugned order that three witnesses have been examined before charge and all have supported the case. The court below found sufficient material to frame charge against the petitioner in this case.
Therefore, this Court does not find any merit in this application. This application is, accordingly, dismissed.
The court below is directed to proceed in the trial in accordance with law.
(Sanjay Priya, J)
ajay gupta/-
| AFR/NAFR | NAFR |
|---|---|
| CAV DATE | NA |
| UploadingDate | 14.12.2017 |
| Transmission Date |
14.12.2017 |
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the application for quashing the order framing charge under Section 245 Cr.P.C. in a cheque bounce case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act has merit.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Amrendra Kumar
The State of Bihar
Satish Kumar
Sanjay Priya
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
