Rajkumar Jaglani vs Shyamlal Naktode
2024 Latest Caselaw 3781 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Rajkumar Jaglani vs Shyamlal Naktode on 8 February, 2024

Author: Pranay Verma

Bench: Pranay Verma

                                                             1
                            IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                  AT INDORE
                                                       BEFORE
                                         HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRANAY VERMA
                                              ON THE 8 th OF FEBRUARY, 2024
                                          MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 5808 of 2024

                           BETWEEN:-
                           RAJKUMAR JAGLANI S/O RAMCHANDRA JAGLANI,
                           AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS, OCCUPATION: BUSINESS R/O;
                           192 B, B-SECTOR, KALANI BAG, DEWAS (MADHYA
                           PRADESH)

                                                                                         .....PETITIONER
                           (BY SHRI ANIMESH SANYAL - ADVOCATE)

                           AND
                           SHYAMLAL NAKTODE S/O SHIVLAL NAKTODE, AGED
                           ABOUT 62 YEARS, OCCUPATION: RETIRED R/O; UJJAIN
                           ROAD, ITAVA, DEWAS (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                       .....RESPONDENT


                                 This application coming on for admission this day, the court passed the
                           following:
                                                              ORDER

This petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the petitioner challenging the order dated 10.03.2021 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, District Dewas registering the complaint preferred by the respondent under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.

02. Though there is no fixed period of limitation for invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. but the delay and latches in approaching the Court can certainly be taken into consideration. The impugned order was passed on 10.03.2021 whereas this petition has been

preferred almost after a period of three years. The order was for directing of registration of the complaint made by respondent and nothing has been brought on record by the petitioner to show as to what has transpired before the trial Court subsequent thereto.

03. This petition has been preferred primarily on the ground that the statutory notice served by the respondent upon the petitioner was at a wrong address. The petitioner is a resident of a different house whereas the notice was sent to a different house hence there has not been any service of notice upon him. Reliance has been placed on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Shakti Travel and Tours Vs. State of Bihar and Another (2002) 9 SCC

4 1 5 and Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod Vs. State of Maharashtra and Another, AIR 2014 SC 3519.

04. The ground as has been taken by the petitioner in this petition is essentially a question of fact i.e. whether notice was served upon the petitioner at his correct address. The same can only be decided upon evidence being led in that regard. That can only be done during the proceedings before the trial Court. It is not for this Court in this petition to determine as to what was the correct address of the petitioner and whether he has been correctly served by the respondent. The judgments relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner are on different aspects altogether and have no applicability to the facts of the present case.

05. Thus, in view of the aforesaid, I do not find any ground to interfere in the matter. The petition being devoid of merits is hereby dismissed.

(PRANAY VERMA) JUDGE

Shilpa