JAI PRAKASH GOYAL Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ramesh Kumar, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

(2.) The present application under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the order dtd. 16/12/2023 passed by Presiding Officer, Additional Court No.3, Agra as well as entire proceeding of Complaint Case No.35153 of 2018, under Sec. 138 N.I. Act, Police Station Hari Parwat, District Agra pending in the court of Additional Court No.3, District Agra.

(3.) Facts giving rise to the present case is that on issuance of summon order against the applicant under Sec. 138 N.I. Act, the applicant filed an Application u/s 482 Cr.,P.C. No. 6433 of 2019 challenging the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No.3513 of 2018. That case was disposed of by this Court vide order dtd. 18/2/2019 permitting the applicant to raise all the dispute regarding the complaint before the trial court. Thereafter, the applicant filed a discharge application before the trial court on 5/3/2019. In that discharge application, the applicant has raised number of issues including the issue of pre-mature complaint as well as cheque in question was given as security, therefore no liability under Sec. 138 N.I. Act is made out and also that complaint was filed by stranger, hence not maintainable. The trial court vide order dtd. 16/12/2023 rejected the aforesaid discharge application vide order dtd. 16/1/2023 on the ground that discharge application is not maintainable as per judgement of Hon'ble Apex Court in Adalat Prasad vs Rooplal Jindal and others; 2004 (7) SCC 338 wherein it is observed that the summoning order cannot be recalled by the court which had issued the same.