Ajay Mittal vs State Of U.P. And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 21497 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 84
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 27666 of 2022
 

 
Applicant :- Ajay Mittal
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Piyush Kishore Srivastava
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.

Sri Piyush Kishore Srivastava, learned counsel for applicant submits that complainant has given a criminal angle to a purely civil dispute. Property in question has already been sold to son of complainant by a registered sale deed and he referred to documents annexed along with this application which is in knowledge of complainant also, therefore, entire allegations are concocted and false.

In order to consider his submissions, I have carefully perused record.

Statement of complainant under Section 200 and witnesses under Section 202 Cr.P.C. states that Rs. 10,00,000/- was given by complainant to applicant, however, property in question was not sold to him and when he confronted applicant, he was assaulted. Counsel for applicant has placed reliance upon a notarized document wherein version of payment of Rs. 10,00,000/- was specifically mentioned.

Learned counsel for applicant wants to rely upon a document which was not placed before Court of Magistrate and he has a complete opportunity to cross complainant in this regard at the stage of Section 244 Cr.P.C. when Court of Magistrate can pass an order under Section 245(2) Cr.P.C. also or after completion of recording of evidence under Section 244 Cr.P.C., applicant will have a liberty to file under Section 245(1) for discharge.

At this stage, learned counsel for applicant submits that non bailable warrant has been issued against applicant, therefore, he may be protected for his appearance that he may cross examine complainant and witnesses under Section 244 Cr.P.C.

Considering above submissions and without interfering in impugned order, non bailable warrant issued against applicant is kept in abeyance for a period of three weeks from today and in case any application for bail is filed, same shall be considered in accordance with law taking note of judgment of Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., (2021) 10 SCC 773. Thereafter, applicant will have liberty to cross complainant and witnesses under Section 244 Cr.P.C. and thereafter, learned trial Court shall pass appropriate order under Section 245(1) or 245(2) Cr.P.C., as case may be, expeditiously.

The proceedings of Complaint Case No. 685 of 2019 (Krishna Gopal vs. Ajay Mittal) under Section 406, 506 I.P.C., P.S.- Civil Lines, District- Meerut, pending before Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Court No.3, Meerut shall be concluded within three months from today.

Application stands disposed of.

Order Date :- 16.12.2022

Nirmal Sinha

(31/282 fresh cases)