Suresh Kumar Aggarwal vs State Of Uttarakhand & Another

Pankaj Purohit, J

By means of present C482 application, applicant has put to challenge the summoning order dated 05.06.2023 as well as the cognizance order dated 13.06.2022, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate/First Additional Civil Judge, Haridwar, whereby the applicant was summoned for facing the trial under Section406 IPC in Complaint Case No.1315 of 2022, Anish Chand Ohri vs. Suresh Kumar Aggarwal as well as the complaint and emanating proceedings therefrom.

Brief facts of the case are that respondent no.2 moved an application/complaint dated 23.03.2022 to the court of learned Judicial Magstrate, Haridwar alleging therein that a deal was finalized by him and his family of Rs.55,00,000/- with the applicant for a factory, namely, M/s Aggarwal Die Casting and Iron Industry, in which, the share of applicant was 36% in partnership and respondent no.2 gave several cheques to the applicant as per the deal. It is also stated in the complaint that due to mistake a cheque of Rs.4,00,000/- has given in excess to the applicant and he did not return the same on the pretext that the amount of said cheque is not payable to him. It is further stated in the complaint that the cheque of Rs.3,00,000/- was given as security to the applicant, which he did not return and misused the same. In the complaint, it is also stated that respondent no.2 made a complaint on 07.02.2022 to the Police Station Kotwali, Haridwar against the applicant for not returning the excess amount received by the applicant and also threatened him of dire consequences.

Thereafter, on 13.06.2022, the learned Judicial Magistrate/First Additional Civil Judge, Haridwar has observed that there is no need of police investigation and the matter was converted into complaint; took cognizance and fixed the matter for recording of evidence under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. On 20.09.2022, respondent no.2 got examined himself under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and other witness on his behalf. Thereafter, learned trial court vide order dated 05.06.2023 summoned the applicant under Section 406 IPC for trial. Hence, the applicant is before this Court

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that since the aforesaid dispute is purely a civil dispute for which civil proceedings are already pending between the parties, therefore, continuation of criminal proceedings is a gross abuse of process of law. Furthermore, the claims, counter claims and responsibilities of parties under the sale agreement is already subject of civil suit. He further submits that the criminal case has been launched just to pressurize the applicant in civil and business disputes.

Per contra, learned State Counsel submits that the ingredients of Section 406 IPC are made out against the applicant.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the entire documents available on record.

From perusal of the complaint as well the entire material available on record, this Court is of the view that prima facie a commission of cognizable offence is made out against the applicant. In this view of the matter, this Court does not want to interfere in the matter as the law is very clear on the point that the inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be resorted to in the rarest of the rare cases. Accordingly, the present C482 application fails and the same is dismissed.

Pending application, if any, stands disposed of accordingly.