Bachan Singh v. Ikramuddin Alias Buli) under Section

applicant and Sri Moti Lal learned AGA for the State.

2. This is an application filed under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. for quashing orders dated 18.03.2025 and 26.06.2023 passed by the Civil Judge (J.D.)/F.T.C. Court No.3, Bulandshahar passed in Complaint Case No.1313/2024 (Old Complaint No.347/2019, Computer No.396/2019, (Bachan Singh Versus Ikramuddin Alias Buli) under Section 138 of N.I. Act, Police Station Gulawathi, District Bulandshahar pending in the court of Civil Judge (J.D.)/F.T.C. Court No.3, Bulandshahar.

3. The applicant herein had preferred an Application U/S 482 No.36302 of 2019, Ikramuddin Alias Buli Vs. State of U.P. and another wherein on 30.9.2019 the following order was passed:- "This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking the quashing of entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 343 of 2019, under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act, Police Station Gulawathi, District Bulandshahar, pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Bulandshahar as well as order dated 27.5.2019 passed by the aforesaid court. Further prayer has been made to stay the further proceedings of the aforesaid case. Heard applicant's counsel and learned AGA. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the entire allegations are false. Cheque in question was not issued against any existing debt or liability. Referring to the entire evidence available on record, it is submitted that the summoning order is illegal and without application of judicial mind. No cause of action arose to file the complaint. On the other hand, learned AGA opposed the prayer. I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire record carefully. The submissions made by the applicant's counsel call for adjudication on pure questions of fact which may be adequately adjudicated upon only by the trial court and while doing so even the submissions made on points of law can also be more appropriately gone into by the trial court in this case. This Court does not deem it proper, and therefore cannot be persuaded to have a pre-trial before the actual trial begins. A threadbare discussion of various facts and circumstances, as they emerge from the allegations made against the accused, is being purposely avoided by the Court for the reason, lest the same might cause any prejudice to either side during trial. But it shall suffice to observe that the perusal of the complaint, and also the material available on record make out a prima facie case against the accused at this stage and there appear to be sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. I do not find any justification to quash the complaint or the summoning order or the proceedings against the applicant arising out of them as the case does not fall in any of the categories recognized by the Apex Court which may justify their quashing. The prayer for quashing the same is refused as I do not see any abuse of the Court's process either. In the last, the counsel has urged before the Court that the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of offence involved are such in which the litigating parties should be given a chance to settle this matter amicably and for this purpose some protective direction may be given by this Court so that adequate steps may be taken in furtherance of the same object. The counsel has also placed reliance on the Apex Court given in the cases of Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H., 2010(5) SCC 663 and Meters and Instruments Private Limited vs. Kanchan Mehta, LAWS(SC) 2017 10 1 in this regard. Submission is that the Apex Court decision has taken cognizance of the heavy pendency of the cases in the courts which may result ultimately in the chocking of criminal justice system. It has been urged that with the laudable object of providing the rival parties, who have hitherto locked their horns in litigation, an opportunity to arrive at a mutually agreeable settlement and put an end to the escalating litigations, the compounding of the offence has not only been encouraged but in order to given incentive to do so at the earliest stage, certain directions have also been issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. As requested by the counsel, it is directed that the accused may appear before the court below within a period of one month from today through the representing counsel and move an application seeking compounding of offence through compromise. On such application being moved, the concerned court may take adequate steps in accordance with law in this regard and shall provide further opportunity to the accused which shall not exceed a maximum period of four months from today to make an endeavour in this direction. Thereafter, the court shall pass necessary orders specifically keeping in view the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Damodar S. Prabhu (supra) as also the latest amendment made in the Act in the year 2018 within a period of five months from today. If the decision of the Court given in the light of the application does not conclude the proceedings against the accused and he is further required to appear and face the trial, the court shall be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law against the accused and take all necessary steps and measures to procure his attendance as the law permits. In the aforesaid period of five months or till the decision given in the light of the application, whichever is earlier, no coercive measures shall be adopted against the accused. It is made clear that no application for extension of time shall be entertained if this order is not availed by the accused in the stipulated period of time. It is further clarified that this order has been passed only with regard to the accused on behalf of whom this application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been moved in this Court. With the aforesaid observations this application is disposed of." 4. Thereafter on 26.6.2023 the court of Civil Junior Division/FTC, Court No.3, Bulandshahr proceeded to pass the following order has been passed:- टट, सट ससवगत हह। वववदत हकतय हह अवर खखड) नययवयक मसजसटट जद० वदनयखवकत 26-4-2018 तवररत नययययलय कक सख०-3 नययययलय ससववल जज ( " बबलनदशहर। पररवयद सखखयय-347/2019 बचन बनयम इकरयमबददन आवद वदनयखक 26-06-2023 पतयवलद पटश हहई। पबकयर पर अवभयबक गण कक ओर सट ककई उपसससत नहह हह। पररवयदद उपसससत। पतयवलद कट अवलककन सट वक यह पररवयद मयननदय उचच इलयहयबयद कट आदटश पयसरनय पत अखतगरत धयरय-482 सखखयय-36306/2019 बचन नययययलय, बनयम इकरयमबददन आवद मम पयररत आदटश वदनयखवकत 30-09-2019 वनणरय कट अनबपयलन मम मयननदय उचच नययययलय, इलयहयबयद मयननदय सवरचच नयययलय कट कट सद०अल० नखबर-12/एडवमन, कट अनबसयर मयननदय उचच नययययलय दयरय ववसध वयवससय ASIAN RESUREFACING OF ROAD ANGENCY VS C.B.I. 2018 SCC ONLINE SC 310 मम यह अवभवनधयरररत वकयय गयय हह वक "In all pending matters before the high courts or other courts relating to PC Act or all other civil or criminal cases, when stay of proceedings in a pending trial is operating, stay will automatically lapse after six monts from today unless extended by a speaking order on above parameters. Same course may also be adopted by civil and criminal appellate/revisional courts under the jurisdiction of the High Courts. The trial courts may, on expiry above period, resume the proceedings without wating for any other intimation unless express ordre extending sta is produced." इस पकयर गह सपष हह वक ससगन आदटश पयररत हकनट कक वतसस सट 06 मयह कट अखदन पबनन उसकक अवसध तयवकर क आदटश पयररत कर नहह बढययय गयय हक तक वह आदटश, मयह कट पशयतत सतन समयप मयनय जयवटगय। इस फफजदयरद पररवयद मम ससगन आदटश पयररत हकनट कक वतसस वदनयखक 30-09-2019 सट छन मयह कक अवसध वयतदत हक चबकक हह। तसय अवभयबकगण दयरय पतयवलद पर ऐसय ककई सयकय यय दसतयवटज दयसखल नहह वकयय गयय हह। सजससट यह वववदत हक वक मयननदय उचच नययययलय, इलयहयबयद क ससगन आदटश अदतन पभयवद हह न हद अवभयबक गण नययययलय मम उपसससत हक आदटश पयररत हकन कक वतसस सट 06 रहट हह। अवभयबकगण सवयख मयननदय उचच नययययलय मम उपसससत हककर ससगन आदटश लययट हह, उनहम उतक पककणर कक पपरद जयनकयरद हह। अतन अवभयबकगण कट ववरद जमयनतद वयरखट जयरद हह। पतयवलद वदनयखक 03-08-2023 कय पहश हद। सबरवभ वमयर) तवररत नययययलय नययय कक सखखयय-03, बबलनदशहर।" नययययलय ससववल जज ( ( अवर खखड)/

5. Thereafter on 18.3.2025 the followed order has been passed:- नययययलय अपर ससववल जज ( " पवर खणड) / नययय कक सख०-3, बबलनदशहर अपर मबखय नययवयक मसजसटट टट, पररवयद सखखयय-1313/2024 Computer No. 396/2019 C.N.R. No. UPBU04-002920-2019 बचचन ससखह बनयम इकरयमबददन उफर बबलद वदनयखक -18.03.2025 एन०आई० एकट कट तहत तलब वकयय गयय सय। पकरण अवभयबक कक हयसजरद कट पतयवलद पटश हहई। पबकयर पर पररवयदद कट ववदयन असधवकय उपसससत हह। अवभयबक इकरयमबददन उफर बबलद गहर हयसजर हह। कक धयरय पतयवलद कट अवलककन सट वववदत हकतय हह वक अवभयबक कक वदनयखक 27.05.2019 138 सलए वनयत हह। उक आदटवशकयएख पहरककयर दयरय पयप कक गई हह वकनतब अवभयबक कट ववरद जयरद आदटवशकयएख बद०डबलप कक तयमदलय करयकर सखबखसधत सयनय पभयरद दयरय नययययलय मम पटवषत नहह कक जय रहद हह। इससट सपष हह वक सयनयधयक दयरय आदटवशकयओख कक तयमदल करयनट मम लयपरवयहद कक जय रहद हह तसय नययययलय कट आदटश कय अनबपयलन करनट मम भद उदयसदनतय कक जय रहद हह। सयनयधयक गबलयवठद कय यह कक तय पबसलस असधवनयम, 1861 कय उलखघन करतय हह। अतन सयनयधयक कककड उक कट बयवत अपनय सपषदकरण वनयत वदनयखक तक पसतबत करम। पतयवलद वदनयखक 21.04.2025 कक वयसतट हयसजरद पटश हक। अवभयबक कट ववरद बद०डबलप जयरद हक। आदटश कक पवत वररष पबसलस अधदकक, वररष पबसलस अधदकक, सयनयधयक कक उवचत वदशय- पवत सखबखसधत सयनयधयक कक वयसतट सपषदकरण पटवषत कक जयए। बबलनदशहर कक बद०डबलप सखलग कर पटवषत कक जययट। बबलनदशहर सट यह अपटकय कक जयतद हह वक वट पकरण मम सखबखसधत वनदरश जयरद कर तयमदल करयनय सबवनवशत करम। आदटश कक एक कक धयरय 23 अपर ससववल जज ( अपर मबखय नययवयक मसजसटट वदनयखक-18.03.2025 पवर खणड) / टट, नययय कक सख०-3, बबलनदशहर" 6. On a specific query being raised to the learned counsel for the applicant whether the applicant has complied with the directions contained in the order dated 30.9.2019 in Application No.36302 of 2019, Ikramuddin Alias Buli Vs. State of U.P. and another, his answer is in negative.

7. In the opinion of the Court once the order passed in the earlier spell of litigation instituted by the applicant has not been complied with and only bailable warrants have been issued, then it is for the applicant to apply for bail and to contest the proceedings.

8. With the aforesaid observations, the application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 1.8.2025 piyush

applicant and Sri Moti Lal learned AGA for the State.

2. This is an application filed under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. for quashing orders dated 18.03.2025 and 26.06.2023 passed by the Civil Judge (J.D.)/F.T.C. Court No.3, Bulandshahar passed in Complaint Case No.1313/2024 (Old Complaint No.347/2019, Computer No.396/2019, (Bachan Singh Versus Ikramuddin Alias Buli) under Section 138 of N.I. Act, Police Station Gulawathi, District Bulandshahar pending in the court of Civil Judge (J.D.)/F.T.C. Court No.3, Bulandshahar.

3. The applicant herein had preferred an Application U/S 482 No.36302 of 2019, Ikramuddin Alias Buli Vs. State of U.P. and another wherein on 30.9.2019 the following order was passed:- "This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking the quashing of entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 343 of 2019, under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act, Police Station Gulawathi, District Bulandshahar, pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Bulandshahar as well as order dated 27.5.2019 passed by the aforesaid court. Further prayer has been made to stay the further proceedings of the aforesaid case. Heard applicant's counsel and learned AGA. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the entire allegations are false. Cheque in question was not issued against any existing debt or liability. Referring to the entire evidence available on record, it is submitted that the summoning order is illegal and without application of judicial mind. No cause of action arose to file the complaint. On the other hand, learned AGA opposed the prayer. I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire record carefully. The submissions made by the applicant's counsel call for adjudication on pure questions of fact which may be adequately adjudicated upon only by the trial court and while doing so even the submissions made on points of law can also be more appropriately gone into by the trial court in this case. This Court does not deem it proper, and therefore cannot be persuaded to have a pre-trial before the actual trial begins. A threadbare discussion of various facts and circumstances, as they emerge from the allegations made against the accused, is being purposely avoided by the Court for the reason, lest the same might cause any prejudice to either side during trial. But it shall suffice to observe that the perusal of the complaint, and also the material available on record make out a prima facie case against the accused at this stage and there appear to be sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. I do not find any justification to quash the complaint or the summoning order or the proceedings against the applicant arising out of them as the case does not fall in any of the categories recognized by the Apex Court which may justify their quashing. The prayer for quashing the same is refused as I do not see any abuse of the Court's process either. In the last, the counsel has urged before the Court that the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of offence involved are such in which the litigating parties should be given a chance to settle this matter amicably and for this purpose some protective direction may be given by this Court so that adequate steps may be taken in furtherance of the same object. The counsel has also placed reliance on the Apex Court given in the cases of Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H., 2010(5) SCC 663 and Meters and Instruments Private Limited vs. Kanchan Mehta, LAWS(SC) 2017 10 1 in this regard. Submission is that the Apex Court decision has taken cognizance of the heavy pendency of the cases in the courts which may result ultimately in the chocking of criminal justice system. It has been urged that with the laudable object of providing the rival parties, who have hitherto locked their horns in litigation, an opportunity to arrive at a mutually agreeable settlement and put an end to the escalating litigations, the compounding of the offence has not only been encouraged but in order to given incentive to do so at the earliest stage, certain directions have also been issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. As requested by the counsel, it is directed that the accused may appear before the court below within a period of one month from today through the representing counsel and move an application seeking compounding of offence through compromise. On such application being moved, the concerned court may take adequate steps in accordance with law in this regard and shall provide further opportunity to the accused which shall not exceed a maximum period of four months from today to make an endeavour in this direction. Thereafter, the court shall pass necessary orders specifically keeping in view the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Damodar S. Prabhu (supra) as also the latest amendment made in the Act in the year 2018 within a period of five months from today. If the decision of the Court given in the light of the application does not conclude the proceedings against the accused and he is further required to appear and face the trial, the court shall be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law against the accused and take all necessary steps and measures to procure his attendance as the law permits. In the aforesaid period of five months or till the decision given in the light of the application, whichever is earlier, no coercive measures shall be adopted against the accused. It is made clear that no application for extension of time shall be entertained if this order is not availed by the accused in the stipulated period of time. It is further clarified that this order has been passed only with regard to the accused on behalf of whom this application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been moved in this Court. With the aforesaid observations this application is disposed of." 4. Thereafter on 26.6.2023 the court of Civil Junior Division/FTC, Court No.3, Bulandshahr proceeded to pass the following order has been passed:- टट, सट ससवगत हह। वववदत हकतय हह अवर खखड) नययवयक मसजसटट जद० वदनयखवकत 26-4-2018 तवररत नययययलय कक सख०-3 नययययलय ससववल जज ( " बबलनदशहर। पररवयद सखखयय-347/2019 बचन बनयम इकरयमबददन आवद वदनयखक 26-06-2023 पतयवलद पटश हहई। पबकयर पर अवभयबक गण कक ओर सट ककई उपसससत नहह हह। पररवयदद उपसससत। पतयवलद कट अवलककन सट वक यह पररवयद मयननदय उचच इलयहयबयद कट आदटश पयसरनय पत अखतगरत धयरय-482 सखखयय-36306/2019 बचन नययययलय, बनयम इकरयमबददन आवद मम पयररत आदटश वदनयखवकत 30-09-2019 वनणरय कट अनबपयलन मम मयननदय उचच नययययलय, इलयहयबयद मयननदय सवरचच नयययलय कट कट सद०अल० नखबर-12/एडवमन, कट अनबसयर मयननदय उचच नययययलय दयरय ववसध वयवससय ASIAN RESUREFACING OF ROAD ANGENCY VS C.B.I. 2018 SCC ONLINE SC 310 मम यह अवभवनधयरररत वकयय गयय हह वक "In all pending matters before the high courts or other courts relating to PC Act or all other civil or criminal cases, when stay of proceedings in a pending trial is operating, stay will automatically lapse after six monts from today unless extended by a speaking order on above parameters. Same course may also be adopted by civil and criminal appellate/revisional courts under the jurisdiction of the High Courts. The trial courts may, on expiry above period, resume the proceedings without wating for any other intimation unless express ordre extending sta is produced." इस पकयर गह सपष हह वक ससगन आदटश पयररत हकनट कक वतसस सट 06 मयह कट अखदन पबनन उसकक अवसध तयवकर क आदटश पयररत कर नहह बढययय गयय हक तक वह आदटश, मयह कट पशयतत सतन समयप मयनय जयवटगय। इस फफजदयरद पररवयद मम ससगन आदटश पयररत हकनट कक वतसस वदनयखक 30-09-2019 सट छन मयह कक अवसध वयतदत हक चबकक हह। तसय अवभयबकगण दयरय पतयवलद पर ऐसय ककई सयकय यय दसतयवटज दयसखल नहह वकयय गयय हह। सजससट यह वववदत हक वक मयननदय उचच नययययलय, इलयहयबयद क ससगन आदटश अदतन पभयवद हह न हद अवभयबक गण नययययलय मम उपसससत हक आदटश पयररत हकन कक वतसस सट 06 रहट हह। अवभयबकगण सवयख मयननदय उचच नययययलय मम उपसससत हककर ससगन आदटश लययट हह, उनहम उतक पककणर कक पपरद जयनकयरद हह। अतन अवभयबकगण कट ववरद जमयनतद वयरखट जयरद हह। पतयवलद वदनयखक 03-08-2023 कय पहश हद। सबरवभ वमयर) तवररत नययययलय नययय कक सखखयय-03, बबलनदशहर।" नययययलय ससववल जज ( ( अवर खखड)/

5. Thereafter on 18.3.2025 the followed order has been passed:- नययययलय अपर ससववल जज ( " पवर खणड) / नययय कक सख०-3, बबलनदशहर अपर मबखय नययवयक मसजसटट टट, पररवयद सखखयय-1313/2024 Computer No. 396/2019 C.N.R. No. UPBU04-002920-2019 बचचन ससखह बनयम इकरयमबददन उफर बबलद वदनयखक -18.03.2025 एन०आई० एकट कट तहत तलब वकयय गयय सय। पकरण अवभयबक कक हयसजरद कट पतयवलद पटश हहई। पबकयर पर पररवयदद कट ववदयन असधवकय उपसससत हह। अवभयबक इकरयमबददन उफर बबलद गहर हयसजर हह। कक धयरय पतयवलद कट अवलककन सट वववदत हकतय हह वक अवभयबक कक वदनयखक 27.05.2019 138 सलए वनयत हह। उक आदटवशकयएख पहरककयर दयरय पयप कक गई हह वकनतब अवभयबक कट ववरद जयरद आदटवशकयएख बद०डबलप कक तयमदलय करयकर सखबखसधत सयनय पभयरद दयरय नययययलय मम पटवषत नहह कक जय रहद हह। इससट सपष हह वक सयनयधयक दयरय आदटवशकयओख कक तयमदल करयनट मम लयपरवयहद कक जय रहद हह तसय नययययलय कट आदटश कय अनबपयलन करनट मम भद उदयसदनतय कक जय रहद हह। सयनयधयक गबलयवठद कय यह कक तय पबसलस असधवनयम, 1861 कय उलखघन करतय हह। अतन सयनयधयक कककड उक कट बयवत अपनय सपषदकरण वनयत वदनयखक तक पसतबत करम। पतयवलद वदनयखक 21.04.2025 कक वयसतट हयसजरद पटश हक। अवभयबक कट ववरद बद०डबलप जयरद हक। आदटश कक पवत वररष पबसलस अधदकक, वररष पबसलस अधदकक, सयनयधयक कक उवचत वदशय- पवत सखबखसधत सयनयधयक कक वयसतट सपषदकरण पटवषत कक जयए। बबलनदशहर कक बद०डबलप सखलग कर पटवषत कक जययट। बबलनदशहर सट यह अपटकय कक जयतद हह वक वट पकरण मम सखबखसधत वनदरश जयरद कर तयमदल करयनय सबवनवशत करम। आदटश कक एक कक धयरय 23 अपर ससववल जज ( अपर मबखय नययवयक मसजसटट वदनयखक-18.03.2025 पवर खणड) / टट, नययय कक सख०-3, बबलनदशहर" 6. On a specific query being raised to the learned counsel for the applicant whether the applicant has complied with the directions contained in the order dated 30.9.2019 in Application No.36302 of 2019, Ikramuddin Alias Buli Vs. State of U.P. and another, his answer is in negative.

7. In the opinion of the Court once the order passed in the earlier spell of litigation instituted by the applicant has not been complied with and only bailable warrants have been issued, then it is for the applicant to apply for bail and to contest the proceedings.

8. With the aforesaid observations, the application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 1.8.2025 piyush