Delhi High Court - Orders
Ms. Pinky vs Sh. Lakhwinder Singh Bharara, on 7 November, 2023
Author: Amit Sharma
Bench: Amit Sharma
$~72
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 8174/2023
MS. PINKY ..... Petitioner
Through: Appearance not given.
versus
SH. LAKHWINDER SINGH BHARARA, ..... Respondent
Through: None.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA
ORDER
% 07.11.2023 CRL.M.A. 30402/2023 (Exemption)
1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. The application is disposed of accordingly.
CRL.M.C. 8174/20233. The present petition under Section 482 of the CrPC seeks following prayers:-
"It is, therefore, most humbly and respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased for quashing and cancelling summons and order dated 15.03.2023 to an accused person in a Summon Case (U/ s 138 NI Act) (Section 68 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, Schedule II, Form 1) IN CT Case NO. 3122/2020 Before LD. MM-05, South East- Saket Courts- Ms. Moksha Vais, P.S. Kalkaji and all other incidental proceedings arising out of the aforesaid CASE NO. 3122/2020 pending in the court of MM-05, SOUTH EAST-SAKET COURTS- MS. MOKSHA VAIS, Title As: Sh Lakhwinder Singh Bharara Versus Future Intradaypositional Long Term Capital Opc Pvt Ltd & Ors. in the interest of justice.
And also praying this Hon'ble court to pass any other order or direction as this Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 08/11/2023 at 01:12:28
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner submits that the petitioner at no point of time was a director of the accused company, namely, Future Intraday Positional Long Term Capital OPC Pvt. Ltd. Attention of this Court was drawn to the complaint filed before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, wherein the necessary averments with respect to the fact that the present petitioner was director at any point of time are not reflected. The subject cheque in question is issued on behalf of the company and the signature on the same is of the co-accused, Mrityunjay Kumar, who is stated to be director of the said company.
5. It is noted that in the complaint at para 9 thereof it is recorded that accused no. 2 (present petitioner) and 3 are the „only partners in the said firm‟. The cheque has admittedly been issued on behalf of the company as mentioned above.
6. Issue notice to respondent, on petitioner taking necessary steps, through all permissible modes, including electronic mail, if any, returnable on 12.02.2024.
7. In the meantime, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner is at liberty to place on record additional documents in support of the present petition before the next date of hearing.
8. Proceedings qua the present petitioner shall remain stayed till the next date of hearing.
9. Order be uploaded on the website of this Court, forthwith.
AMIT SHARMA, J NOVEMBER 07, 2023/sn This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 08/11/2023 at 01:12:28