Delhi High Court - Orders
Bijay Pratap Singh vs State Nct Of Delhi And Anr on 11 July, 2025
Author: Neena Bansal Krishna
Bench: Neena Bansal Krishna
$~44 & 45
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 4537/2025, CRL.M.A. 19765/2025 & CRL.M.A.
19766/2025
BIJAY PRATAP SINGH .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Shree Prakash Sinha, Mr. M. P.
Singh, Mr. Rakesh Mishra and
Mr. Rishabh Kumar, Advocates
versus
STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Shoaib Haider, APP for the State
45
+ CRL.M.C. 4538/2025, CRL.M.A. 19768/2025 & CRL.M.A.
19769/2025
BIJAY PRATAP SINGH .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Shree Prakash Sinha, Mr. M. P.
Singh, Mr. Rakesh Mishra and
Mr. Rishabh Kumar, Advocates
versus
STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ANR .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Shoaib Haider, APP for the State
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
ORDER
% 11.07.2025
1. Petition No. 4537/2025 is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 on behalf of the Petitioner challenging the Orders dated 18.09.2024 and 11.02.2025 passed by learned ASJ in Criminal Revision No. 184/2024 with the directions that the learned Sessions Judge may be directed 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 14/07/2025 at 22:42:39 to hear the matter on merits or in the alternative, quash the Summoning Order dated 16.09.2017 and the criminal proceedings emanating out of CC No. 5893/2017 pending before the learned JMFC.
2. Petition No. 4538/2025 is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 on behalf of the Petitioner challenging the Summoning Order dated 16.09.2017 passed by learned ASJ and the entire criminal proceedings arising out of CC No. 5894/2014 as well as to quash the Order dated 19.09.2024 in Criminal Revision No. 176/2024.
3. The complaint under Section 138 NI Act was filed by the Respondent No. 2 against the Accused No. 1-Company and its three Directors who were Accused No. 2 to 4. Accused No. 3 and 4 were the signatories of the cheque. It is claimed that there were no averments made against the present Petitioner (Accused No. 2), that had he been involved in day to day functioning of the Accused No. 1-Company.
4. The Summons were issued on 16.09.2017 against the Petitioner as well as the other co-accused. Notice was framed under Section 251 Cr.P.C. on 24.05.2022.
5. In the meanwhile, CIRP proceedings were initiated against Accused No. 1-Company. The Resolution Plan was approved on 24.02.2020 and accordingly, Accused No. 1-Company was discharged by the learned Trial Court on 08.05.2023.
6. The Accused No. 4 settled the dispute with the Complainant Company and paid his share of the cheque amount as decided between them. Accordingly, he got acquitted on 05.09.2023.
7. The Petitioner submits that apportionment of vicarious liability of the 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 14/07/2025 at 22:42:39 Directors is not permissible as has been done by way of the Settlement. Accused No. 3 has died immediately thereafter, on 29.09.202.
8. In these circumstances, the Petitioner filed Criminal Revision No. 184/2024 challenging the Order framing Notice under Section 251 Cr.P.C. dated 24.05.2022 alongwith an Application for condonation of delay, which was allowed subject to cost of Rs.20,000/-, on 18.09.2024. However, on account of failure to pay the cost, the Revision Petition was dismissed on 11.02.2025.
9. It is further submitted that another Complaint Case No. 5894/2017 titled as Ashish Sharma vs. M/s. Maple Realcon Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. arising out of the same transaction, was filed in which Notice under Section 251 Cr.P.C. was framed vide common Order dated 24.05.2022. However, the Criminal Revision No. 176/2024 filed against the said Order, was dismissed on the ground of delay vide Order dated 19.09.2024 with a cost of Rs.20,000/-.
10. Submissions heard and record perused.
11. The Petitioner has thus approached this Court for quashing of both the Complaint Cases under Section 138 NI Act on the ground that there is no averment in the complaints of the Petitioner being involved in the day-to- day activities of the Company. Moreover, he is not the signatory to the cheque. The Accused No. 4 has already settled the dispute with the Complainant and has been acquitted on 05.09.2023. In these circumstances, the Complaint Cases are liable to the quashed.
12. It is pertinent to note that the Petitioner had been summoned vide Order dated 16.09.2017 but there was not challenge ever made by the Petitioner to the Order of summoning. The Notice was framed on 24.05.2022 leading to filing of two separate Revision Petitions challenging 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 14/07/2025 at 22:42:39 the framing of Notice in 2024 alongwith Condonation Application.
13. While in Criminal Revision No. 184/2024, Condonation Application was allowed subject to cost of Rs.20,000/-; in the second Revision Petition No. 176/2024, Condonation Application was dismissed with the cost of Rs.20,000/- on 19.09.2024. However, despite the two Revision Petitions being dismissed in September, 2024, no further action had been taken by the Petitioner and now after 09 years, the Petitioner has approached this Court seeking quashing of the Complaint Cases.
14. Complainant‟s evidence has already been recorded. Considering the inordinate delay in approaching the Court and also that the trial is almost complete, in it not considered expedient in the interest of justice to entertain these Petitions at such a highly belated stage in which Notice framed on 24.05.2022 is sought to be challenged which was done by way of the Revision Petitions.
15. Considering the delay and that the trial is continuing, the Petitions are dismissed with liberty to the Petitioner to raise all the pleas and contentions before the learned Trial Court.
16. Pending Applications also stand dismissed.
17. On the request of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner, the cost of Rs.20,000/- imposed while dismissed the Criminal Revision No. 176/2024, is hereby waived.
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J JULY 11, 2025 N 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 14/07/2025 at 22:42:39 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 14/07/2025 at 22:42:39