2023 Supreme(All) 2284
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J.
Smt.Minakshi And Another - Appellants
Versus
State of U.P And Another - Respondents
APPLICATION U/S 482 NO. 34636 OF 2022.
Decided On : 08-05-2023
Advocates appeared:
For the Applicant : Laxmi Kant Bhatt.
For the Opposite Party : G.A., Anil Kumar Mishra, Raj Kumar Singh, Rishi Shrivastava.
Headnote:(A) Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Section 138 - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482 - Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash summoning order - The complaint alleges dishonor of cheques issued for repayment of a loan - The applicants argued non-maintainability of the complaint due to delay in service of notice. The court held that the complaint could not be quashed at this stage as disputed questions of fact are involved which require evidence. (Paras 1, 10, 14)
(B) Quashing of complaints - High Court's inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be exercised sparingly, with judicial discretion to avoid arbitrary outcomes inconsistent with the nature of judicial proceedings - The principle established that courts should not engage in fact-finding at this pre-trial stage and should allow proceedings to follow due process. (Paras 13, 14)
Facts of the case:
The opposite party no.2 lent a total amount of Rs.18,00,000/- to the applicants, which included two cheques amounting to Rs.14,00,000/- which were dishonored. The complaint was filed after the notice was served but contested claim about the repayment by the applicants was made.
Findings of Court:
The Court found no illegality in the summoning order and dismissed the plea to quash it, indicating an assessment of disputed facts should be done in trial court.
Issues: The main issues addressed were the maintainability of the complaint and exercise of discretion by the High Court in quashing summoning orders.
Ratio Decidendi: High Court emphasized that it cannot examine merits or dismiss a complaint where factual disputes exist, reaffirming the necessity for the trial court to resolve these disputes based on evidence.
Result: Application dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application under section 482 cr.p.c. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. court's analysis of evidentiary standards (Para 4 , 10 , 12 , 13) |
| 3. arguments regarding maintainability of the complaint (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. principles for quashing under section 482 (Para 11 , 14) |
| 5. dismissal of the application to quash (Para 15) |
JUDGMENT
Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan, J.
On 24.03.2023, the following order was passed:-
"1. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging a summoning order dated 27.10.2021 passed in Complaint Case No. 1108 of 20211, under section 168 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and Section 420 I.P.C., and judgement dated 03.9.2022 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 15, Meerut in Criminal Revision No. 107 of 20222 Police Station Medical, District Meerut.
2. Previously on 13.12.2022, on the solemn undertaking of Sri Laxmi Kant Bhatt, learned counsel for the applicants, an interim protection was granted to the applicants with a condition that the applicants will handover a draft of Rs. 12 lakhs to opposite party no. 2 - Mrs. Sansarwati. In the said order, the Court further observed that in the event, the applicants fail to comply with the directions of this Court, the interim protection given today shall automatically deemed to be vacated and Registrar (Compliance) was directed to inform the court concerned to recover the entire amount by using all his might and power to recover the entire amount with 6% compound interest over it and hand over the same to the opposite party no.2 within a month thereafter.
3. Sri Anil Kumar Mishra, earlier counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Sri Rajat Aren, subsequently engaged counsel on behalf of opposite party no. 2 are present. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 submit that in between the date of interim order i.e. 13.12.2022 and today, the matter has been listed on three occasions i.e. 05.01.2023, 11.01.2023 and 03.03.2023 but the record was not sent to the Court by the office.
4. The Court finds that in order to get a favourable order, an undertaking was given by learned counsel for the applicants, however, to evade from making payment in compliance of the earlier order dated 13.12.2022, learned counsel for the applicants is not present even in the revised call today.
5. Perusal of record reveals that a letter dated 09.01.2023 was placed before the Registrar (Compliance), High Court, Allahabad by Sri Anil Kumar Mishra, learned counsel, who was representing opposite party no 2 at the relevant point of time, informing about non-compliance of the order dated 13.12.2022. In spite of letter dated 09.01.2023 and directions issued by this Court dated 13.12.2022, the Registrar (Compliance) has not placed any information if he has informed the court concerned about the order of this Court dated 13.12.2022, for necessary compliance.
6. With regard to the falling standard of Members of the Bar, apart from merits of the present case, it is apposite to remind a recent order of this Court dated 20.01.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. No. 6819 of 20213, wherein the counsel concerned placed two orders of same date in same case with different contents. The said issue is still drawing attention of this Court. Relevant excerpt of the said order reads thus:
Perusal of both the orders, quoted above, reveals different contents though the details mentioned in "cause title' and "order date' are same. This obfuscating state of facts is necessitated to be scrutinized. Today again no one is present on behalf of the applicants even in revised call.
Daring or it may be called in literal words 'insincere' act of an Advocate does not allow my consciousness to eschew it in such a bizarre situation where the concerned responsible person is trying to hide by adopting the practice of absenteeism.
Courts always have respect and faith over, even any vocal statement advanced by a lawyer at Bar and hardly express disbelie
Click Here to Read the rest of this document
Back
