Delhi High Court - Orders
Neeraj Jain vs Mool Chand Saini And Anr on 3 September, 2024
Author: Neena Bansal Krishna
Bench: Neena Bansal Krishna
$~21 & 22
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 1561/2024
NEERAJ JAIN
.....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Manoj Jain and Mr. S.P. Gairotra,
Advocate.
versus
MOOL CHAND SAINI AND ANR.
.....Respondent
Through: Ms. Himanshi, Advocate for R-1.
22
+ CRL.M.C. 1685/2024, CRL.M.A. 6472/2024
NEERAJ JAIN
.....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Manoj Jain and Mr. S.P. Gairotra,
Advocate.
versus
MOOL CHAND SAINI AND ANR
.....Respondent
Through: Ms. Himanshi, Advocate for R-1.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
ORDER
% 03.09.2024
1. A Petitioner under Section 482 Cr.P.C has been filed on behalf of the petitioner Neeraj Jain for quashing of the Order dated 12.10.2021 and 25.01.2024.
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 05/09/2024 at 01:27:15
2. It is submitted in the petition that the petitioner was not a signatory to the cheque and he is only the brother of respondent No.2 Mayank Jain, who had signed the cheque. It is, therefore, submitted that no offence is made out under Section 138 N.I. Act against him and the Summoning Order as well as the Notice under Section 251 Cr.P.C is liable to be quashed.
3. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 has addressed arguments.
4. Submissions heard.
5. The perusal of the Summoning Order dated 12.10.2021 reflects that the counsel for the complainant in the opening paragraph had stated that he does not want to purse the complaint against the accused Neeraj Jain.
6. It is quite evident that the complaint under Section 138 N.I. Act was not pursued against the petitioner against which it was dropped. Furthermore, the admission/denial of the documents under Section 294 Cr.P.C had been done by accused Mayank Jain. Apparently, the Notice under Section 251 Cr.P.C which has been framed on 25.01.2024, is framed wrongly against Neeraj Jain.
7. There is error apparent on the face of the record, therefore, the Notice under Section 251 Cr.P.C framed vide Order dated 25.01.2024, is hereby set aside with the directions to the learned M.M to frame the Notice correctly against the correct accused person.
8. The petitions stands allowed and are disposed of accordingly.
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J SEPTEMBER 3, 2024/va 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 05/09/2024 at 01:27:15