Breaking

Section 138 NI Act: Revision is not maintainable against the order passed under Section 251 of CrPC

A bench of Justice Shrivastava in the case titled as Smt. Rekha Agrawal vs. Ramu Sharma & Another on 18.10.2019 has held that revision is not maintainable against the order passed under Section 251 of CrPC.

Complainant filed a private complaint under Section 138 of the NI Act, stating therein that after dishonour of the cheque in question, statutory notice was sent to the applicant.

The trial Court after perusing the material and the statements available on record found that there are sufficient grounds for framing the charge and accordingly framed the charge against the applicant for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the NI Act vide order dated 12.11.2018.

Feeling aggrieved, the applicant preferred criminal revision under Section 397 read with Section 399 of CrPC before the Sessions Court.

The Sessions Court vide impugned order dated 11.4.2019 dismissed the revision holding that the revision against the order passed under the provision of Section 251 of CrPC is not maintainable, and affirmed the order of JMFCm Sheopur.

Accused then approached the High Court which observed and held as under:

“In Adalat Prasad v. Rooplal Jindal & others [2004 SCC (Cri) 1927] and Subramanium Sethuraman v. State of Maharashtra and another [AIR 2004 SC 4711], the Honble Apex Court has held that revision against summoning order is not maintainable and the only remedy available to the accused against the summoning order is to move the High Court for invoking jurisdiction under Section 482 of CrPC.

Even in Bhajanlal and others vs. State of UP and another [(2006) 5 All LJ 175] it has been held that revision against the summoning order is not legally maintainable.

In view of the aforesaid annunciation of law, in the present case the revisional Court has not committed any error in rejecting the revision being not maintainable against the order passed under Section 251 of CrPC. …

In view of the aforesaid discussion, I find no perversity or illegality in the order impugned passed by the Court below warranting any interference by this Court at the stage of framing of charge.

Consequently, the petition has no substance and is hereby dismissed. The interim order dated 13.5.2019 passed by this Court staying proceedings of the trial Court is vacated”

Case Title: Smt. Rekha Agrawalya vs. Ramu Sharma

Bench: Hon. Shri Justice Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava

Case No: Misc. Criminal Case No. 19180/2019

MCRC_19180_2019_FinalOrder_18-Oct-2019-Nyay-Sanhita

Leave a Reply