Madan Lal Jain vs State Of U.P. And Another
2016 Latest Caselaw 7534 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 48
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 38234 of 2016
 

 
Applicant :- Madan Lal Jain
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Achyutanand Pandey
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.

The present application has been filed by the applicant under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings of complaint case no. 856 of 2016, under Sections 138 Negltiable Instruments Act, Police Station Hari Parwart, District Agra arising out of summoning order dated 7.5.2016 pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.10, Agra. Further prayer has been made to stay the further proceedings of the aforesaid case.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned AGA appearing for the State.

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that complaint is filed by the husband of the holder in due course of the cheque in question and the court concerned has illegally entertained the same. It was further argued that applicant was summoned on the basis of the said fact. It was further argued that two cheques have been issued but present complaint is in respect of only one cheque. It was further argued that statement under Section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. have not been recorded. 

On the other hand, learned AGA has opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant. 

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, after perusing the entire record and having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that no case is made out to interfere with the impugned order. The impugned order does not suffer from any infirmity or illegality. There is no need to record statement under Section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. as affidavit filed in support of complaint is sufficient to proceed with the matter. The Magistrate dealing with complaint at this stage has to see only prima-facie case and it cannot be said that no prima-facie case is made out against the applicants. Further, the plea raised before this Court would require leading of evidence, which can be raised before the court concerned at the appropriate Stage. Hence, the prayer made in the present application is refused.

The application is dismissed.

Order Date :- 13.12.2016

Sachdeva