IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc. Application(C482) No. 436 of 2010 Ajay Kumar Garg S/o Late Shri Nathu Mal Garg R/o Village Majra, Shimla By Pass Road Pargana Central Doon Police Station Patel Nagar District, Dehradun. ……..…Applicant Versus 1. State of Uttarakhand through Principle Secretary of Home, Dehradun. 2. Shri Govind Ballabh Raturi S/o Late Shri Malik Lal Raturi R/o House No. 579, Pragati vihar Haridwar Road, Dhampur Dehradun ..……Opposite parties Shri Sandeep Tandon, Advocate, with Ms. Deepa Arya, Advocate, Shri Jitendra Bisht, Advocate, and Shri Moh. Azim, Advocate, present for the petitioner. Shri M.A. Khan, Brief Holder, present for the State. Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Heard. 2 2. By means of this petition moved under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure (for short Cr.P.C,) 1973, the petitioner has sought quashing of the proceedings of criminal complaint case no. 1341 of 2008 (old no Misc. Case no. 278 of 2008 & 1777 of 2008), Govind Ballabh Raturi vs. Ajay Kumar Garg, relating to offence punishable under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, P.S. Nehru Colony, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, I, Dehradun. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the criminal complaint filed by respondent no. 2 was admittedly barred by time. However, an application was moved by the complainant with the criminal complaint, proviso to clause (b) of section 142 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, for condonation of delay which was allowed by Judicial Magistrate, without issuing notices to the accused (petitioner). 4. Having considered submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner and after going through the impugned orders passed by the Magistrate, this Court finds that the 3 Magistrate has erred in law in not issuing notice to the complainant on delay condonation application filed with criminal complaint. That being so impugned orders dated 04.06.2009 and 10.12.2009, cannot be sustained. 5. Therefore, this petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C, is summarily disposed of, quashing the order dated 04.06.2009 and order dated 10.12.2009, passed by Judicial Magistrate, I, Dehradun. It is directed that Magistrate shall give an opportunity to the accused (petitioner) before passing orders on application moved under section 142(b) of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, and after such application if allowed, he shall proceed further on the question as to whether the accused is to be summoned or not. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of. Dt:18.05.2010 parul (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) 4