Allahabad High Court
Arun Kumar Acharya vs State Of U.P. And Another on 23 August, 2022
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 87 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2167 of 2022 Revisionist :- Arun Kumar Acharya Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Yogesh Kumar Srivastava,Sanjay Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.
Heard Sri Sanjay Kumar, learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri Jhamman Ram, learned AGA for the State-respondent.
The instant revision has been moved by the revisionist with a prayer to quash the order dated 28.3.2022 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate/Civil Judge (Senior Division), FTC, Manipur in Misc. Application No. 244 of 2021 by which application filed u/s 156 (3) Cr.P.C. has been rejected.
Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that the revisionist moved an application under section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. against the opposite party no. 2 but his application moved under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. was dismissed by the court below. He next submitted that from the perusal of the application moved by revisionist u/s 156 (3) Cr.P.C. a prima facie cognizable offence against the opposite party no. 2 is made out but in spite of that his application was dismissed. He next submitted that as opposite party no. 2 committed the theft of the cheque book of the revisionist and later on, utilized the same, therefore, it cannot be said that no prima facie cognizable offence against him is made out, therefore, impugned order dated 28.3.2022 is illegal.
Per contra, learned AGA submitted that from the perusal of the application moved by revisionist under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C., it appears that it is based on suspicion and as on the day when revisionist was having cheque book with him, opposite party no. 2 was also sitting with him and when the notice in respect of Rs. Thirty-four lacs was received by revisionist then revisionist started saying that opposite party no. 2 stolen the cheque book of revisionist and utilized the same and as entire application u/s 156 (3) Cr.P.C. is based on speculation, therefore, the application moved by revisionist u/s 156 (3) Cr.P.C. was rightly dismissed by court below.
I have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record of the case.
From the perusal of the record, it reveals that an application u/s 156 (3) Cr.P.C. was moved by revisionist against the opposite party no. 2 and as per application u/s 156 (3) Cr.P.C., on 9.7.2021 a notice was received by revisionist in which, opposite party no. 2 claimed Rs. Thirty-four lacs from him and only on the basis of that notice, revisionist assumed that his cheque book was stolen by opposite party no. 2. Further from the perusal of the impugned order dated 28.3.2022, it appears that revisionist took a loan of Rs. Thirty-four lacs from opposite party No. 2 and in lieu thereof two cheques were issued to him but those cheques were dishonoured then legal notice in this regard was sent by the opposite party no. 2 to the revisionist and therefore, it appears that only due to this reason on the basis of false allegation, application u/s 156 (3) Cr.P.C. was moved by revisionist. Therefore, in view of the matter, there is no illegality in the impugned order.
Accordingly, the instant revisionist stands dismissed.
Order Date :- 23.8.2022 Ankita