Research › Browse › Judgment

Supreme Court of India · body

2024 DIGILAW 34 (SC)

Exim Creation v. State of U. P.

2024-01-08

HRISHIKESH ROY, PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA

body2024
ORDER : 1. Leave granted. 2. Heard Mr. Abhishek Vikas, learned counsel appearing for the appellants. The State of Uttar Pradesh is represented by Mr. Sudeep Kumar, learned counsel. The common informant (respondent No. 3) is represented by Mansoor Ali, learned counsel. 3. The learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants are named as accused, inter-alia, in the Complaint Case No. 37399/2022 and 37401/2022, under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The accused preferred two separate applications under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashment of the Complaint and the summon order. Both applications were listed on the same day i.e. 21.07.2023 but before different Benches of the same High Court. 4. Interestingly, in the Application U/S 482 - No. 26221 of 2023 of the Cr.P.C. notice was issued by the learned Judge in the quashing application pertaining to the Complaint Case No. 37399/2022 with protective order for the accused. Whereas in the other case - Application U/S 482 No. 26224 of 2023, the other Bench opined that the application filed under Section 482 is devoid of merit and was accordingly dismissed. 5. Assailing the view taken by the Bench in the application under Section 482 No. 26224 of 2023, Mr. Abhishek Vikas, the counsel would argue that since common contention was raised in the case in the dispute between the same set of parties, there should have been analogous consideration of both the cases. 6. The above contention for analogous consideration is not seriously disputed by the learned counsel for the State as also by the informant. However, Mr. Mansoor Ali, learned counsel for the Informant submits that the appellants are not participating in the Trial Court. In response, Mr. Abhishek Vikas, learned counsel submits that the appellants will immediately enter appearance before the Trial court. The Counsel’s statement is taken on record. 7. Having regard to the above, we deem it appropriate to set aside the impugned order dated 21.07.2023 in the Application U/S 482 No. - 26224 of 2023. Accordingly, the matters are remitted back to the High Court so that Application U/S 482 No. - 26224 of 2023 and the other connected matters i.e. Application U/S 482 - No. 26221 of 2023 can be taken up for analogous consideration by the High Court. It is ordered accordingly. 8. Accordingly, the matters are remitted back to the High Court so that Application U/S 482 No. - 26224 of 2023 and the other connected matters i.e. Application U/S 482 - No. 26221 of 2023 can be taken up for analogous consideration by the High Court. It is ordered accordingly. 8. The parties are at liberty to mention for expeditious disposal of the two pending cases and the same should be considered appropriately. 9. With the above order, the appeals are disposed of. Pending applications, if any, stand closed.