Allahabad High Court
Vishwa Nath Gupta vs State Of U.P. And Another on 4 June, 2025
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:95169 (Sl No.1536 ) Court No. - 37 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 6002 of 2024 Revisionist :- Vishwa Nath Gupta Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Deepak Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J.
1. Heard Sri Deepak Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri Rajiv Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The instant revision has been filed being aggrieved by order dated 12.05.2023 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Shahjahanpur, whereby the Criminal Revision No. 267 of 2022 filed by the opposite party no. 2 was allowed and the order of the trial court dated 01.10.2019 whereby the opposite party no. 2 was summoned for the offence under Section 420 was set aside and also an order dated 16.01.2024 passed by Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Court No. 35, Shahjahanpur in Complaint Case No. 65 of 2022 whereby the complaint filed by the revisionist has been dismissed.
3. The case of the revisionist is that he has filed a Complaint Case No. 18 of 2019, alleging some business transactions between the revisionist and the opposite party no. 2 in connection therewith; some cheques were issued by the opposite party no. 2, which were dishonored being outdated. Initially, by order dated 01.10.2019, the trial court summoned the opposite party no. 2. However, from the perusal of the said order, it appears that summoning order was passed mechanically without adverting to the facts of the case. The said order was set aside in the Criminal Revision No. 267 of 2022 filed by the opposite party no. 2 vide impugned order dated 12.05.2023 and the matter was remanded back to the trial court to pass a fresh order after hearing the parties. Thereupon vide order dated 16.01.2024, after considering the case on merits, the trial court has dismissed the complaint filed by the revisionist herein.
4. In the aforesaid complaint, the allegation is with regard to the offences under Sections 420 and 406 I.P.C. Admittedly, there was a business transaction between the revisionist and the opposite party no. 2 and that business transaction continued for quite sometime. In view thereof, it cannot be said that there was any element of cheating on the part of opposite party no. 2 at the initial stage. Thus, the offence under Section 420 as alleged is not made out. Likewise, it was a case of business transaction between the parties and it was purely a commercial dispute between the parties. Therefore, the offence under Section 406 is also not made out. Though, some cheques were issued by the opposite party no. 2, those were dishonored not because of any fault on the part of the opposite party no. 2 but because of fault on the part of the revisionist, as the same were presented beyond validity period of the cheque.
5. In view of the aforesaid, this Court not does not find any illegality in the impugned order dated 12.05.2023 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Shahjahanpur.
6. The instant revision isdismissed, accordingly.
Order Date :- 4.6.2025 Ruhi H. (Anish Kumar Gupta, J.)