IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION (C-482) No. 49 Of 2005 Ashish Jain S/o Harish Chandra 68, Vinay Nagar, Bodla Road P.S Jagdishpur, Agra, U.P ………………..Applicant Versus 1. State of Uttaranchal (Uttarakhand) 2. Basant Consul, S/o Not known Director M/s Private Computer Firm Haldwani, District Nainital ………….Opposite parties Shri R.K.Verma, Advocate, holding brief of Shri K.S.Verma, Advocate present for the petitioner Shri M.A.Khan, Brief Holder, present for State Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. By means of this petition, moved under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (for short of Cr.P.C), the petitioner has sought quashing of the proceedings of Criminal Complaint Case No. 2447 of 2002 M/s Private Computer Firm Haldwani vs. Ashish Kumar Jain, Pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haldwani, District Nainital. 2 (2) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent no.2 ( complainant) filed the criminal complaint case alleging that firm known as Manglam Enterprises, Agra, was liable to pay certain amount including sum Rs. 19,713.50 to the complainant firm namely M/s Private Computer Firms Haldwani. It was alleged in the complaint that cheque no. 863692 for an amount of Rs. 9,032.50 dated 22.03.1999, cheque no. 863693 for an amount of Rs. 19,687.50 and cheque no. 863694 dated 10.04.1999 for an amount of Rs. 29,658.50 were issued on behalf of Manglam Enterprises. However, the said cheques were dishonoured, and after the notice was served criminal complaint was filed in the year 1999. The Magistrate, after recording statement of the complainant under section 200 of Cr.P.C., summoned the accused Ashish Kumar Jain (present petitioner) to face the trial, in respect of offence punishable under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act 1881. (3) Learned counsel for the petitioner argued 3 that before this court that the petitioner Ashish Kumar Jain is not the signatory of the cheques. He further pleaded that no offence is made out against the petitioners even if the contents of complainant are taken to be true. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the complainant, it is pleaded that accused Ashish Kumar Jain projected himself as proprietor of Maglam Enterprises Agra. However, from the perusal of copy of application (Annexure 3 to the petition) moved under section 319 Cr.P.C., by the complainant before the trial court, it is clear that complainant himself has sought that Ashish Kumar Jain be summoned in the case who was said the signatory of the cheques. (4) In the above circumstances, this petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C, is disposed of with the direction that the proceedings of the impugned criminal complaint case no 2447 of 2002 pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haldwani, District Nainital are quashed to the extent it relates to the present petitioner Ashish Kumar Jain, leaving it open to 4 the trial court to proceed against the Anil Kumar Jain if it finds that the offence is made out against the said person. Registry is directed to inform the court concerned. (Interim order dated 27.01.2005, stands vacated). (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt.23.11.2010 N.P