Court No. - 77 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 41947 of 2024 Applicant :- Bharat Sharma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mukesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J. 1. Heard Sri Mukesh Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri P.P. Tiwari, learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking quashing of the entire proceeding of complaint case No. 2743 of 2014, under Section 138 N.I. Act, P.S. Jagdishpura, District Agra, pending before A.C.J.M., court No.10, Agra. 3. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the impugned proceeding is absolutely erroneous because opposite party No.2 had filed another complaint regarding cheque No. 000023 in lieu of which the applicant filed a fresh cheque bearing No. 000029 on the basis of which the impugned proceeding has been initiated, therefore, pursuing two proceedings regarding one cheque is abuse of process of the Court. 4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer on the ground that there is no illegality in the impugned proceeding. 5. After hearing the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record, it appears that in discharge of certain liability, cheque No. 000023 was issued by the applicant in favour of opposite party No.2 and on bouncing of the same a complaint under Section 138 N.I. Act was filed by opposite party No.2 against the applicant. Thereafter, the applicant in lieu of that cheque handed over the cheque No. 000029 which is the cheque in question and when the same was presented, it was also returned by the bank. Therefore, the impugned proceeding has been initiated. 6. So far as the contention of learned counsel for the applicant that on the basis of one liability two proceedings cannot be initiated is concerned, the same can be raised by the applicant during trial but it cannot be a ground to quash the impugned proceeding. At the most, the earlier complaint regarding cheque No. 000023 can be said to be prima facie illegal but that also cannot be a ground to quash the impugned proceeding which was initiated on bouncing of the cheque in question which was issued in lieu of the earlier cheque. 7. Apart from this, this Court also finds that the proceeding is of the year 2014 and the same is at the advance stage in which the applicant is not participating in trial, therefore, after almost nine years it would not be appropriate to interfere in such proceeding. However, the court below is directed to decide the complaint case No. 2743 of 2014, under Section 138 N.I. Act, P.S. Jagdishpura, District Agra, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receiving a copy of this order. 8. In view of the above, this Court does not find any illegality in the impugned proceeding. Accordingly, the application is dismissed. 9. Registrar (compliance) is directed to communicate this order to the court below for compliance. Order Date :- 6.3.2025 Vandana Digitally signed by :- VANDANA GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad