Asar Mohammad @ Asru vs State Of U.P. And Another
2019 Latest Caselaw 4931 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 80
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 19658 of 2019
 

 
Applicant :- Asar Mohammad @ Asru
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Rai
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. Perused the record.

This application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the summoning order dated 31.7.2017 along with entire proceedings passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 2, Muzaffar Nagar in Complaint Case No. 130/9 of 2017 (Afzal Vs. Asar Mohammad) under sections 406 & 506 IPC, P.S. Shikheda, District Muzaffar Nagar.

From perusal of impugned order, it appears that a complaint was filed against applicant with the allegation that on 19.9.2015 he took loan from the complainant and when complainant demanded it back, he refused to repay back and finally said that no loan has ever been taken from him. Thereafter, evidence under sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. was taken by the court below and the court below passed the impugned order summoning the applicant under sections 406 and 506 IPC.

From perusal of record, there appears to be legal remedy available to the applicant either for filing criminal revision against the summoning order before the Competent Court or to move an application by putting his appearance before the court below at the stage of 244 and 245 Cr.P.C. to argue on charge and convince the court that since the matter pertains to civil dispute, no charge is made out against him.

Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the dispute is purely of civil nature. The criminal proceedings initiated pursuant to complaint filed by complainant are nothing but abuse of process of court, hence the entire proceedings consequent to summoning order may be quashed.

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer of applicant and submitted that against summoning order, the applicant has an alternative remedy of filing criminal revision before the competent court.

In view of above, I do not find any force in the application for quashing the impugned order.

However, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, this application is finally disposed of with the direction that if the applicant surrenders and applies for bail before the competent court within a month from today, his bail application shall be considered and decided if possible on the same day.

Application is finally disposed of.

Order Date :- 23.5.2019

RCT/-