Bhupendra Sharma vs St. Theresa Girls Higher Secondary ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 16049 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Bhupendra Sharma vs St. Theresa Girls Higher Secondary ... on 29 May, 2024

Author: Maninder S. Bhatti

Bench: Maninder S. Bhatti

                                                           1
                           IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                AT JABALPUR
                                                       BEFORE
                                       HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANINDER S. BHATTI
                                                 ON THE 29 th OF MAY, 2024
                                          MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 3285 of 2024

                          BETWEEN:-
                          BHUPENDRA SHARMA S/O LATE SHRI V. P. SHARMA,
                          AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCCUPATION: PRIVATE WORK
                          R/O B/ 17 PADMNATH NAGAR NEAR SUBHASH NAGAR
                          RAISEN ROAD BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                         .....APPLICANT
                          (BY SHRI ANUBHAV SINGHAL - ADVOCATE)

                          AND
                          1.    ST. THERESA GIRLS HIGHER SECONDARY
                                SCHOOL THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SISTER
                                MARIYA DIAS AGED ABOUT YEARS R/O B
                                SECTOR PIPLANI DISTRICT BHOPAL (MADHYA
                                PRADESH)

                          2.    STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICE
                                STATION PIPLANI DISTRICT BHOPAL (MADHYA
                                PRADESH)

                                                                                      .....RESPONDENTS
                          (BY SHRI AJAY TAMRAKAR - PANEL LAWYER )

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

This is a petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking quashment of the order dated 05.12.2023 by which, an application filed under Section 220 (1) of Cr.P.C. has been dismissed by the Appellate Court.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the present applicant was being prosecuted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and

simultaneously, a case under Sections 420 and 406 of IPC was also registered against the applicant. It is contended by the counsel that the applicant moved an application before the trial Court under Section 220(1) of Cr.P.C and prayed that both the cases be tried together. The said case which was registered vide M.Cr.C. No.9335/2011 was allowed by this Court vide order 25.08.2015 and this Court, allowed the application filed under Section 220 of Cr.P.C. It is contended by the counsel that despite that order, both the cases were not tried together, and therefore, an appropriate application under Section 220 of Cr.P.C. was filed by the applicant which has been declined by the Appellate Court. Thus, counsel submits that the order passed by the Appellate Court is

unsustainable.

2. Having considered the submissions advanced on behalf of the applicant, a perusal of the order dated 05.12.2023 passed by the Appellate Court makes it abundantly clear that the case has been finally decided by the trial Court vide judgment dated 24.06.2022 and against which, the present applicant has preferred an appeal. Both the cases, were decided on 24.06.2022. The subject matter of both the cases were different as one of the case was filed under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and the other case was registered under Sections 420 and 406 of IPC. The cases were tried and decided by the judgment on the same day i.e. 24.06.2022. Accordingly, the Appellate Court has rejected the application filed by the applicant under Section 220(1) of Cr.P.C.

6. On due consideration, this Court does not find any infirmity or perversity in the order passed by the Appellate Court. Accordingly, no interference with the impugned order is warranted.

7. Resultantly, the petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. stands

dismissed.

(MANINDER S. BHATTI) JUDGE mn