- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the records.
(2.) Complaint case no. 1800/2008 (Brijbhan Singh Vs. Kamleshwar Kumar Tripathi) was filed when cheque issued by accused Kamleshwar Kumar Tripathi in favour of complainant Brijbhan Singh was dishonoured and he had not paid amount of cheque after legal notice served on him. The cognizance for summoning the accused was taken by trial court for offences under section 138 N.I. Act and sections 418 and 420 IPC. Certified copies of documents produced before this Court show that parties had compromised the matter outside the court, and thereafter complainant Brijbhan Singh had moved application and affidavit before trial court with prayer that on the basis of compromise, he does not want to prosecute the case, which may be dismissed. But said application was not disposed of by trial court, the apparent reason for which appears that accused was absent in spite of non-bailable warrant issued against him. These proceedings are challenged by applicant, the accused of original case, through present application under section 482 CrPC.
(3.) In G. Sagar Suri & another Vs. State of U.P. & others, 2000 CrLJ 824 the Apex Court had held as under:- "A criminal complaint under Section 138 of the negotaible Instrument Act is already pending against the appellants and other accused. They would suffer the consequences if offence under Section 138 is proved against them. In any case there is no occasion for the complainant to prosecute the appellants under Sections 406/420 I.P.C. and in his doing so it is clearly an abuse of the process of law and prosecution against the appellants for those offences is liable to be quashed, which we do.";