Allahabad High Court
Kalyan Singh vs State Of U P And 2 Others on 21 August, 2020
Bench: Manoj Misra, Samit Gopal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 48 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 7691 of 2020 Petitioner :- Kalyan Singh Respondent :- State Of U P And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashutosh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J.
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
Heard Sri Ashutosh Kumar Mishra for the petitioner through video conferencing; learned A.G.A., who is physically present, for the respondents 1 and 2; and perused the record.
The instant petition seeks quashing of the first information report dated 13.3.2020 registered as Case Crime No. 0259 of 2020, under Sections 406, 420,467, 468, 471 I.P.C., P.S. Quarsi, District Aligarh.
The impugned first information report, which has been lodged by the respondent no. 3, alleges that the respondent no. 3 had advanced a sum of Rs. 6,30,000/- to the petitioner and in lieu thereof, the petitioner gave four cheques. The allegation is that those cheques were dishonoured with remark that signature of drawer differs with the specimen signature available with the bank. It is alleged in the F.I.R. that when money was demanded, the petitioner turned dishonest and set up a case that those cheques were stolen and misused by the informant. It is further alleged that the petitioner had set up a false case that the amount of loan was repaid when, in fact, it was not.
Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that appropriate course for the informant is to draw proceeding under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act and that, in any view of the matter, the petitioner had already moved an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. against the informant and others in respect of utilizing the stolen cheques. It has further been submitted that bank account of the petitioner discloses that certain amount was withdrawn from the bank account of the petitioner to repay the loan amount to the informant.
We have considered the submissions and have perused the record.
Admittedly, there is no account to account transfer of loan amount by the petitioner to the informant. The cheques alleged to have been issued by the petitioner in favour of the informant were dishonoured. Though the case of the petitioner is that those cheqeues were stolen and were never issued by the petitioner but that is a matter of defence and would have to be tested on the basis of material collected during course of investigation and the evidence led in trial.
In so far as the case of the petitioner with regard to re-payment of loan to the informant is concerned, there is no supporting evidence of any account to account transfer or by way of receipt. The petitioner claims that he had withdrawn the amount from his bank account to make payment to the informant. Whether the cash withdrawn was handed over to the informant to make payment of the loan amount, is a matter of investigation and therefore, at this stage, by considering the defence plea, the prayer to quash the first information report cannot be accepted more so when the same discloses commission of cognizable offence.
The petition is dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to apply for bail/anticipatory bail, as may be advised.
The party shall file computer generated copy of order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by it alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person(s) (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number(s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of the computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 21.8.2020 Naresh