Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 74994 (ALL)

ARVIND AGRAWAL v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

NA528/24763/2025 · 2025-08-10

Vikas Budhwar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:135241 Court No. - 75 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 24763 of 2025 Applicant :- Arvind Agrawal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Bharat Bhushan Paul,Prateek Bansal,Saurabh Paul Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Sri Saurabh Paul, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vikas Sharma, learned State Law Officer for the State. 2. This is an application under Section 528 of BNSS preferred to quash the entire proceeding of Case No. 1296/2018 U/s 138 NI Act, pending in the Court of Civil Judge C.D./F.T.C., Hathras as well as summoning order dated 12-03-2019 passed by Civil Judge C.D./F.T.C., Hathras and Order dated 07-04-2025 passed by Civil Judge F.T.C., Hathras. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that a complaint stood lodged by O.P. No.2 on 13.07.2018 against the applicant under Section 138 of the N.I. Act with an allegation that with respect to discharge of a liability, the applicant herein had drawn a cheque bearing number "989793" dated 01.05.2018 of an amount of Rs.6,00,000/-, which on presentation in the bank on 10.05.2018 came to be dishonoured followed by a statutory demand notice dated 05.06.2018 and the complaint under Section 138 on 13.07.2018 and the applicant came to be summoned on 12.03.2019 under Section 138 of the NI Act. Thereafter, the applicant preferred a discharge application, which came to be rejected on 07.04.2025. 4. Questioning the summoning order, as well as the order rejecting the discharge application, the applicant has preferrd the present application. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that there are fundamental errors, which goes to the root of the matter and the applicant could not have been summoned. Less to say that even the complaint itself was not maintainable for more than one reason; firstly the cheque had been drawn on behalf of the Firm, but the Firm was not marked as accused in the complaint, secondly there is no recital contained in the complaint regarding service of statutory demand notice. He further submits that now, non-bailable warrants have been issued. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that even the court below has rejected the discharge application though noticing the contention, but without going into the same in the correct perspective. 6. Learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that whatever might be, in view of the Constitutional Bench judgment in In Re: in expeditious trial of cases under Section 138 of N.I. Act, 1881, in Re: (2021) 16 SCC 116, the discharge in the proceedings under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, would not be maintainable. He further submits that the summoning order is of the year 2019 and the applicant herein has approached in the year 2025. However, according to him, it is for the applicant to take all legal and factual ground while contesting the trial. 7. At this juncture, learned counsel for the applicant submits that non-bailable warrants have been issued. According to him a recall application would be filed. However, till the disposal of the recall application, no coercive action be taken. 8. Considering the submissions so made across the Bar, as well as the stand taken by the rival parties, the application stands disposed of directing the applicant to submit a recall application by 04.09.2025 and on the submission of the recall application, the court below shall decide the same with most expedition. 9. Till disposal of the recall application for recalling of the non- bailable warrant, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant with respect to Case No. 1296/2018 U/s 138 NI Act, pending in the Court of Civil Judge C.D./F.T.C., Hathras as well as summoning order dated 12-03-2019 passed by Civil Judge C.D./F.T.C., Hathras and Order dated 07-04-2025 passed by Civil Judge F.T.C., Hathras. 10. The protection accorded to the applicant is only available subject to compliance of terms and conditions and timeline as provided herein and in case of default, the order shall stand vacated without reference to the Bench. Order Date :- 11.8.2025 Rajesh Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad