TANUJ AGARWAL Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A complaint bearing C.P. Case no. 1849 of 2007 has been filed by ICICI Bank Limited against the petitioner for commission of offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act. Subsequently, on 16.7.2010, an application was filed by the complainant under Section 257 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for withdrawal of the case but the court instead of passing order on that application proceeded with the matter whereby it first issued warrant of arrest and then issued processes under Sections 82 and 83 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the petitioner. However, when the petitioner appeared, was granted bail. In spite of that, no order was passed on the applica tion which had been filed by the complainant under Section 257 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, rather the court proceeded with the matter whereby the court vide its order dated 27.3.2012 directed the petitioner to remain present physically on 18.4.2012. On that date, the petitioner did not appear and, there fore, bail bond was cancelled and the warrant of arrest was ordered to be issued against the petitioner. Subsequently on 7.7.2012 an order was passed for issuance of process under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Being aggrieved with those orders, this application has been filed.

(2.) MR . Shailesh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that when an application was filed by the complainant under Section 257 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner was sure that the case would be withdrawn but in stead of passing any order on that application, the court proceeded with the matter and hence, the court was not justified in passing the order as aforesaid.

(3.) IN the result, this application stands allowed.