Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:24184 Court No. - 74 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 38718 of 2024 Applicant :- M/S A.V. Construction And Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Himanshu Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Sri Hianshu Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Muni Raj Mehrotra, learned AGA for the State. 2. In view of the order, which is being proposed to be passed today, notices are not being issued to the respondent No. 2. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that a complaint stood lodged against the applicants by the opposite party No.2 on 22.2.2023 under Section 138 of N.I. Act relatable to the allegation that though a cheque dated 31.10.2023, HDFC Bank, Bhopal bearing No.000079 was issued by the applicant No.1 in favour of opposite party No.2, but the same stood dishonoured on account of insufficient funds. Notices were also issued, but the payments were not made. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that on 13.3.2024, the applicants were summoned. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants while inviting attention towards the order-sheet dated 22.8.2024 reference whereof has been given in paragraph 13 of the application, submits that by virtue of cheque No.006487 and 006507 of HDFC Bank, Rs.2 lakhs has already been paid. He submits that now the matter needs to be compounded, however, the opposite party No.2 has preferred an application on 11.9.2024 Annexure-7, page-58 of the paper- book, reference whereof has been made in paragraph-14 of the application in order to harass the applicants. 5. Prayer in the present application is to quash the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No.30 of 2024 (Arun Tomar vs. MAV Construction and others) under Section 138 of NI Act as well as summoning order dated 13.3.2024. 6. Learned counsel for the applicants has relied upon a decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Raj Reddy Kallem vs. The State of Haryana (Criminal Appeal No.2210 of 2024 arising out of SLP (Crl) No.629 of 2023) decided on 8.4.2024 so as to contend that once the compensation has already been made good, then in exercise of the provisions contained under Section 258 Cr.P.C., the Magistrate has the power to stop proceedings in certain cases. He further submits that the case of the applicants needs to be compounded and the proceedings be dropped and the same be led to rest. Thus, it is submitted that a direction be issued to the court below to do the needful in view of the mandate. 7. Learned AGA, on the other hand, submits that be that as it may, once it is the case of the applicants that the amount stood paid then merely making payment would not absolve the criminality aspect, however, in view of the provisions contained under Cr.P.C./B.N.S.S. as well as the judgment referred to by the applicants, the applicants may approach the court below, who shall take into account each and every aspect and, thereafter, proceed to pass appropriate orders as warranted in the facts of the case. 8. Considering the submissions made across the Bar, the application stands disposed of granting liberty to the applicants to prefer appropriate application as maintainable and permissible under law while relying upon the provision of Cr.P.C./B.N.S.S. and also the judgment of Raj Reddy Kallem (supra) and in case, such a proceeding is to be undertaken, then the court has no reason to disbelieve that the same shall be given a logical end. 9. With the aforesaid observations, this application is consigned to records. Order Date :- 19.2.2025 LN Tripathi Digitally signed by :- LALIT TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad