Smt. Anju Taneja vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2023 Latest Caselaw 7751 MP

                                                            1
                            IN    THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                AT JABALPUR
                                                     BEFORE
                                    HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PREM NARAYAN SINGH
                                                 ON THE 11 th OF MAY, 2023
                                          MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 9981 of 2021

                           BETWEEN:-
                           SMT. ANJU TANEJA W/O SHRI BALRAJ TANEJA, AGED
                           ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/O B-09, SANT AASHRAM NAGAR,
                           BAG MUGALIYA, DISTRICT BHOPAL, (MADHYA
                           PRADESH)

                                                                                        .....APPLICANT
                           (BY SHRI MANISH DATT - SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH SHRI MAYANK
                           SHARMA - ADVOCATE )

                           AND
                           1.    THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THRO. DISTT.
                                 MAGISTRATE,   DISTT.  BHOPAL   (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                           2.    SHUBHALAY VILLA (PARTNERSHIP FIRM),
                                 THROUGH PROPRIETOR SHRI SHISHIR KHARE
                                 S/O LATE SHRI GOPILAL, R/O E-7/158, NIG, ARERA
                                 COLONY, BHOPAL, DISTRICT BHOPAL (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                           3.     SHRI SHISHIR KHARE S/O LATE SHRI GOPILAL
                                 KHARE, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/O G-2/194,
                                 GULMOHAR     COLONY BHOPAL,      DISTRICT
                                 BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           4.    SMT.NANDA KHARE W/O SHRI SHISHIR KHARE,
                                 AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/O G-2/194, GULMOHAR
                                 COLONY, BHOPAL, DISTRICT BHOPAL (MADHYA
                                 PRADESH)

                                                                                     .....RESPONDENTS
                           (MS. PRIYANKA JAIN - PANEL LAWYER FOR RESPONDENT NO.1/STATE)

                                 This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
                           following:
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VAISHALI
TRIPATHI
Signing time: 12-05-2023
16:43:14
                                                                2
                                                                ORDER

Heard on the application filed under Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C. seeking leave to appeal against the judgment dated 25/01/2021 passed in Criminal Case No.2046/2015.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as per prosecution story respondent nos.2 to 4 who stand acquitted was initially charged for offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 on the allegation that they issued a cheque in favour of applicant for discharge of their legal liability, which on being presented for encashment got dishonored. Accused have not paid the cheque amount. Hence, complaint under Section

200 of Cr.P.C was filed by the applicant against the respondent nos.2 to 4 for alleged offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act. Thus, Court below has committed an error of law which warrants interference.

I have heard him at length and perused the record. Prima facie, I find substance in the argument of learned Counsel for applicant. The finding in the impugned judgment shows that there is a transaction of Rs.47,80,000/- through cheque No.130772 dated 10.10.2014. However, the learned Trial Court has find that the cheque was issued towards security. Virtually this matter is called for further consideration which can only be examined when both parties would appear before the Court. Accordingly, this Court deem it proper to grant leave to file appeal.

It is directed that this matter be converted into criminal appeal. The bailable warrants of Rs.25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand) each be issued against the respondent nos. 2 to 4 for securing their presence on a date fixed by the Registry.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: VAISHALI TRIPATHI Signing time: 12-05-2023 16:43:14

(PREM NARAYAN SINGH) JUDGE VPA

Signature Not Verified Signed by: VAISHALI TRIPATHI Signing time: 12-05-2023 16:43:14