SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(All) 3056

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J
Gaurav Sharma - Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. and another –Respondent 
APPLICATION U/S 482 NO. 4834, 6746 OF 2022
Decided on : 25-08-2025

Advocates:
Petitioner:Aushim Luthra , Sr. Advocate and Virendra Nath Upadhyay
Respondent: Indra Deo Mishra , Rajesh Kumar Roy Sharma and Sangeeta Yadav

The court determined that a legally enforceable debt existed at the time of the cheque's issuance, validating the complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

Headnote:(A) Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Section 138 - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482 - Complaints for dishonoured cheques - The court held the claim of no legally enforceable debt at the time of cheque issuance was misconceived based on the MOU between parties dated 04.01.2020. The cheques were issued as security for amounts due, and the court found a legally enforceable debt existed. (Paras 4(i), 4(iv), 20)

(B) Liabilities under MOU - The MOU specified payment obligations, making the cheques valid as they were drawn before the due date. Complaints were timely filed after notices served as per legal requirements. (Paras 10, 18)

Facts of the case:
Applications under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. filed to quash the proceedings initiated by the opposite parties for dishonoured cheques totaling Rs. 96,95,193/-, accompanied by claims of illegality due to absence of a legal debt. (Paras 2, 3)

Findings of Court:
The court affirmed the legal enforceable debt existed at the time of cheque dishonour, dismissing the applicant's claims on legal grounds. The complaints were valid, and the payments were overdue as per MOU terms. (Paras 20)

Issues: The primary issue was whether there existed a legally enforceable debt against the applicant upon the issuance of the cheques. (Paras 8)

Ratio Decidendi: The issuance of cheques corresponded directly to obligations specified in the MOU, establishing a legally enforceable debt at that time, thereby upholding the proceedings under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. (Paras 20)

Result: Applications U/S 482 dismissed.

Table of Content
1. factual background of complaints under n.i. act. (Para 2)
2. details of second complaint under n.i. act. (Para 3)
3. arguments against the complaints under n.i. act. (Para 4)
4. opposite party's arguments regarding the legality of cheques. (Para 6)
5. context for legally enforceable debt. (Para 8 , 9)
6. interpretation of mou clauses regarding debt. (Para 10 , 11 , 12)
7. relevance of previous judgments. (Para 13 , 14)
8. court's conclusion on enforceability of debt. (Para 18 , 19 , 20)
9. final order and dismissal of applications. (Para 21 , 22)

JUDGMENT :

SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.

1. As in both the cases, common questions of fact and law arises between the same parties with regard to same subject matter, therefore, above noted cases are being decided by a common judgment.

Brief facts of Application U/S 482 No. 4834 of 2022

2. The Application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred as “Cr.P.C.”) has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 114 of 2020 ( Gaurav Sharma Vs. Ankit Agarwal ) under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, (hereinafter referred as “N.I. Act”), Police Station-Tajganj, District Agra, as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 22.02.2021 pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra.

2(i) Complaint Case No. 114 of 2020 has been filed alleging that the applicant and opposite party no. 2 had been running a partnership business by the name of Bankey Bihari Vidhya Mandir and the opposite party no. 2 decided to end the partnership and withdraw his share, in pursuance thereof, it was decided that a sum of Rs. 38,95,193/- would be paid by the applicant. It is further alleged that a cheque bearing no. 105359 dated 25.9.2020 had been issued by the applicant in favour of the opposite party no. 2 and when the same was placed before the Bank on 05.10.2020, the same was dishonoured on 5.10.2020 due to insufficient funds as well as stop payment by applicant.

2(ii). The opposite party no. 2 informed the applicant regarding the said dishonour of cheque and thereafter one legal notice dated 14.10.2020 had been sent to the applicant by his counsel through registered post and was duly served to the applicant on 17.10.2020, since then no payment was made. Hence, impugned complaint dated 17.11.2020 has been filed against the applicant.

Brief facts of Application U/S 482 No. 6746 of 2022

3. The Application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 113 of 2020 (Ashish Agarwal Vs. Gaurav Sharma) under Section 138 of N.I. Act, Police Station-Tajganj, District Agra, as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 22.02.2021 pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra.

3(i). Complaint Case No. 113 of 2020 has been filed alleging that the applicant and opposite party no. 2 had been running a partnership business by the name of Bankey Bihari Vidhya Mandir and the opposite party no. 2 decided to end the partnership and withdraw his share, in pursua nce thereof, it was decided that a sum of Rs. 58,00,000/- would be paid by the applicant. It is further alleged that a cheque bearing no. 105358 dated 25.9.2020 of Rs. 58,00,000/- had been issued by the applicant in favour of the opposite party no. 2 and when the same was placed before the Bank on 30.09.2020, it was dishonoured on 30.9.2020 due to insufficient funds as well as stop payment by applicant.

3(ii). The opposite party no. 2 informed the applicant regarding the said dishonour of cheque and thereafter one legal notice dated 14.10.2020 has been sent to the applicant by his counsel through registered post, which has been duly served to the applicant on 17.10.2020, since then no payment was made. Hence, impugned complaint dated 17.11.2020 has been filed against the applicant.

Arguments on behalf of the applicant

4. Learned senior counsel for the applicant submits that the impugned complaints have been filed on the basis of f

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top