Bachan Singh v. Ikramuddin Alias Buli) under Section

"Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking the quashing of entire proceeding of Complaint Case no. 345 of 2019 (Bachan Singh Vs. Ikramudding), under section 138 of the N.I.Act, P.S. Gulawathi, District- Bulandshahr as well as order dated 27.5.2019 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1. Further prayer has been made to stay the further proceedings of the aforesaid case. 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 litigation, 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:- ददनननक " 26-06-2023 पतनवलल पपश हहई। पपकनर पर अदभयपक गण कक ओर सप ककई उपसससत नहह हह। पररवनदल उपसससत। पतनवलल कप अवलककन सप दक यह पररवनद मनननलय उचच नयनयनलय, इलनहनबनद कप आदपश पनसरनन पत अनतगरत धनरन-482 सनखयन- 36293/2019 बचन बननम इकरनमपदलन आदद मम पनररत आदपश ददनननदकत 1-10-2019 दवददत हकतन हह सप ससदगत हह। जल० ददनननदकत 26-4-2018 दनणरय कप अनपपनलन मम मनननलय उचच नयनयनलय, इलनहनबनद मनननलय सवरचच नययनलय कप कप सल०अल० ननबर-12/एडदमन, कप अनपसनर मनननलय उचच नयनयनलय दनरन दवधध वयवससन ASIAN RESUREFACING OF ROAD AGENCY VS C.B.I. 2018 SCC ONLINE SC 310 मम यह अदभदनधनरररत दकयन गयन हह दक "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 months 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 waiting for any other intimation unless express order extending stay is produced." इस पकनर यह सपष हह दक ससगन आदपश पनररत हकनप कक दतधस सप 06 उसकक अवधध तनदकर क आदपश पनररत कर नहह बढनयन गयन हक तक वह आदपश, हकनप कक दतधस सप 06 मनह कप पशनतत सतन समनप मननन जनवपगन। मनह कप अनदर पपनन आदपश पनररत इस फफजदनरल पररवनद मम ससगन आदपश पनररत हकनप कक दतधध ददनननक 1-10-2019 सप छन मनह कक अवधध वयतलत हक चपकक हह। तसन अदभयपकगण दनरन पतनवलल पर ऐसन ककई सनकय यन दसतनवपज दनधखल नहह दकयन गयन हह। धजससप यह दवददत हक दक मनननलय उचच नयनयनलय, इलनहनबनद कन ससगन आदपश अदतन पभनवल हह न हल अदभयपक गण नयनयनलय मम उपसससत हक रहप हह। अदभयपकगण सवयन मनननलय उचच नयनयनलय मम उपसससत हककर ससगन आदपश लनयप हह, उनहम उक पककणर कक पपरल जननकनरल हह। अतन अदभयपकगण कप दवरद जमननतल वनरनट जनरल हह। पतनवलल ददनननक -03-08-2023 कक पपश हक।"

5. Thereafter on 18.3.2025 the followed order has been passed:- "ददनननक -18.03.2025 पतनवलल पपश हहई। पपकनर पर पररवनदल कप दवदनन अधधवकन उपसससत हह। अदभयपक इकरनमपदलन उफर बपलल गहर हनधजर हह। एन०आई० एकट कप तहत तलब दकयन गयन सन। पकरण अदभयपक कक हनधजरल कप कक धनरन पतनवलल कप अवलककन सप दवददत हकतन हह दक अदभयपक कक ददनननक 27.05.2019 138 धलए दनयत हह। उक आदपदशकनएन पहरककनर दनरन पनप कक गई हह दकनतप अदभयपक कप दवरद जनरल आदपदशकनएन बल०डबलप कक तनमललन करनकर सनबनधधत सननन पभनरल दनरन नयनयनलय मम पपदषत नहह कक जन रहल हह। इससप सपष हह दक सनननधयक दनरन आदपदशकनओन कक तनमलल करननप मम लनपरवनहल कक जन रहल हह तसन नयनयनलय कप आदपश कन अनपपनलन करनप मम भल उदनसलनतन कक जन रहल हह। सनननधयक गपलनवठल कन यह कक तय पपधलस अधधदनयम, 1861 कन उलनघन करतन हह। अतन सनननधयक कककड उक कप बनवत अपनन सपषलकरण दनयत ददनननक तक पसतपत करम। कक धनरन 23 पतनवलल ददनननक 21.04.2025 हक। कक वनसतप हनधजरल पपश हक। अदभयपक कप दवरद बल०डबलप जनरल आदपश कक पदत वररष पपधलस अधलकक, वररष पपधलस अधलकक, सनननधयक कक उदचत ददशन- पदत सनबनधधत सनननधयक कक वनसतप सपषलकरण पपदषत कक जनए।" बपलनदशहर कक बल०डबलप सनलग कर पपदषत कक जनयप। बपलनदशचर सप यह अपपकन कक जनतल हह दक वप पकरण मम सनबनधधत दनदरश जनरल कर तनमलल करननन सपदनदशत करम। आदपश कक एक

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 01.10.2019 in Application No.36293 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 :- 5.8.2025 N.S.Rathour (Vikas Budhwar, J) NIPENDRA SINGH RATHOUR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

"Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking the quashing of entire proceeding of Complaint Case no. 345 of 2019 (Bachan Singh Vs. Ikramudding), under section 138 of the N.I.Act, P.S. Gulawathi, District- Bulandshahr as well as order dated 27.5.2019 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1. Further prayer has been made to stay the further proceedings of the aforesaid case. 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 litigation, 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:- ददनननक " 26-06-2023 पतनवलल पपश हहई। पपकनर पर अदभयपक गण कक ओर सप ककई उपसससत नहह हह। पररवनदल उपसससत। पतनवलल कप अवलककन सप दक यह पररवनद मनननलय उचच नयनयनलय, इलनहनबनद कप आदपश पनसरनन पत अनतगरत धनरन-482 सनखयन- 36293/2019 बचन बननम इकरनमपदलन आदद मम पनररत आदपश ददनननदकत 1-10-2019 दवददत हकतन हह सप ससदगत हह। जल० ददनननदकत 26-4-2018 दनणरय कप अनपपनलन मम मनननलय उचच नयनयनलय, इलनहनबनद मनननलय सवरचच नययनलय कप कप सल०अल० ननबर-12/एडदमन, कप अनपसनर मनननलय उचच नयनयनलय दनरन दवधध वयवससन ASIAN RESUREFACING OF ROAD AGENCY VS C.B.I. 2018 SCC ONLINE SC 310 मम यह अदभदनधनरररत दकयन गयन हह दक "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 months 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 waiting for any other intimation unless express order extending stay is produced." इस पकनर यह सपष हह दक ससगन आदपश पनररत हकनप कक दतधस सप 06 उसकक अवधध तनदकर क आदपश पनररत कर नहह बढनयन गयन हक तक वह आदपश, हकनप कक दतधस सप 06 मनह कप पशनतत सतन समनप मननन जनवपगन। मनह कप अनदर पपनन आदपश पनररत इस फफजदनरल पररवनद मम ससगन आदपश पनररत हकनप कक दतधध ददनननक 1-10-2019 सप छन मनह कक अवधध वयतलत हक चपकक हह। तसन अदभयपकगण दनरन पतनवलल पर ऐसन ककई सनकय यन दसतनवपज दनधखल नहह दकयन गयन हह। धजससप यह दवददत हक दक मनननलय उचच नयनयनलय, इलनहनबनद कन ससगन आदपश अदतन पभनवल हह न हल अदभयपक गण नयनयनलय मम उपसससत हक रहप हह। अदभयपकगण सवयन मनननलय उचच नयनयनलय मम उपसससत हककर ससगन आदपश लनयप हह, उनहम उक पककणर कक पपरल जननकनरल हह। अतन अदभयपकगण कप दवरद जमननतल वनरनट जनरल हह। पतनवलल ददनननक -03-08-2023 कक पपश हक।"

5. Thereafter on 18.3.2025 the followed order has been passed:- "ददनननक -18.03.2025 पतनवलल पपश हहई। पपकनर पर पररवनदल कप दवदनन अधधवकन उपसससत हह। अदभयपक इकरनमपदलन उफर बपलल गहर हनधजर हह। एन०आई० एकट कप तहत तलब दकयन गयन सन। पकरण अदभयपक कक हनधजरल कप कक धनरन पतनवलल कप अवलककन सप दवददत हकतन हह दक अदभयपक कक ददनननक 27.05.2019 138 धलए दनयत हह। उक आदपदशकनएन पहरककनर दनरन पनप कक गई हह दकनतप अदभयपक कप दवरद जनरल आदपदशकनएन बल०डबलप कक तनमललन करनकर सनबनधधत सननन पभनरल दनरन नयनयनलय मम पपदषत नहह कक जन रहल हह। इससप सपष हह दक सनननधयक दनरन आदपदशकनओन कक तनमलल करननप मम लनपरवनहल कक जन रहल हह तसन नयनयनलय कप आदपश कन अनपपनलन करनप मम भल उदनसलनतन कक जन रहल हह। सनननधयक गपलनवठल कन यह कक तय पपधलस अधधदनयम, 1861 कन उलनघन करतन हह। अतन सनननधयक कककड उक कप बनवत अपनन सपषलकरण दनयत ददनननक तक पसतपत करम। कक धनरन 23 पतनवलल ददनननक 21.04.2025 हक। कक वनसतप हनधजरल पपश हक। अदभयपक कप दवरद बल०डबलप जनरल आदपश कक पदत वररष पपधलस अधलकक, वररष पपधलस अधलकक, सनननधयक कक उदचत ददशन- पदत सनबनधधत सनननधयक कक वनसतप सपषलकरण पपदषत कक जनए।" बपलनदशहर कक बल०डबलप सनलग कर पपदषत कक जनयप। बपलनदशचर सप यह अपपकन कक जनतल हह दक वप पकरण मम सनबनधधत दनदरश जनरल कर तनमलल करननन सपदनदशत करम। आदपश कक एक

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 01.10.2019 in Application No.36293 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 :- 5.8.2025 N.S.Rathour (Vikas Budhwar, J) NIPENDRA SINGH RATHOUR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad