Back
2018 Supreme(Raj) 1709
IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Mr. Vijay Bishnoi, J.
Abubakar - Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan - Respondent
Criminal Misc(Petitioner.) No. 1547 of 2018
Decided On : 17-05-2018
Mr. D.K. Gaur, Adv., for the Petitioner; Mr. M.S. Panwar, Public Prosecutor, for the Respondent No.1
Simultaneous proceedings under Section 138 of NI Act and criminal trial for offence under Section 420 IPC are permissible
Headnote:
Criminal Misc. Petition - Section 482 Cr.P.C. - Court upholds simultaneous proceedings under Section 138 of NI Act and criminal trial for offence under Section 420 IPC
Fact of the Case:
Dispute over payment of money, petitioner gave a dishonored cheque, trial court took cognizance under Section 420 IPC
Finding of the Court:
Court upholds simultaneous proceedings under Section 138 of NI Act and criminal trial for offence under Section 420 IPC
Issues: Dispute over taking cognizance under Section 420 IPC while proceedings under Section 138 of NI Act are pending
Ratio Decidendi: Proceedings under Section 138 of NI Act and criminal trial for offence under Section 420 IPC can run simultaneously against accused person
Final Decision: Criminal misc. petition dismissed, stay petition also stands dismissed
JUDGMENT
VIjay Bishnoi, J. - This criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner being aggrieved with the order dated 02.04.2018 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge No.5, Jodhpur Metropolitan in Criminal Revision No.45/2018, whereby the revision petition filed by the petitioner has been dismissed. The said revision petition was filed by the petitioner being aggrieved with the order dated 07.02.2017 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate No.3, Jodhpur Metropolitan (hereinafter to be referred as the trial court') in FR No.574/2015 arising out of FIR No.411/2015 of Police Station Udaimandir, District Jodhpur, whereby the trial court took cognizance against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 420 IPC.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the dispute between the petitioner and the respondent No.2 is regarding payment of money, for which the petitioner gave a cheque to the respondent No.2, however, when the same was dishonored, the respondent No.2-complainant filed a complaint against the petitioner under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act (hereinafter to be referred as 'the NI Act') and the same is pending consideration and looking to this fact, the trial court has grossly erred in taking cognizance against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 420 IPC.
3. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and having gone through the impugned orders, I am of the opinion that the trial court has rightly observed that the proceedings under Section 138 of NI Act and criminal trial in respect of a criminal offence can run simultaneously against accused person.
4. Hence, no interference is called for in this criminal misc. petition and the same is hereby dismissed.
5. Stay petition also stands dismissed.
