Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:15921 Court No. - 12 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 483 No. - 251 of 2025 Applicant :- Mohd. Javed Malik Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mahmood Alam,Akil Imam,Mayank Dwivedi,Syed Saad Anwar,Umang Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Heard Sri Mahmood Alam, learned counsel for the applicant and the A.G.A. on behalf of the State. 2. It has been submitted on behalf of the applicant that a complaint was lodged by the applicant stating that he had advances an amount of Rs.34,05,750/- to opposite party No.2 in installments but the same was never returned by opposite party No.2. It is further stated that opposite party No.2 had given a cheque to the applicant of the aforesaid amount which was dishonored and consequently legal notice was sent to opposite party No.2 and despite expiry of the given period when the payment was not made the applicant had filed a compliant under Section 138 of N.I. Act cognizance of which was taken by the trial court. 3. A perusal of the order sheet indicates that summons were issued firstly on 18.9.2024 and date was fixed for 28.11.2024 for appearance of opposite party No.2 but he did not appear and again case was fixed for 20.1.2025 on which date the applicant himself did not appear and had sought exemption and the case was directed to be listed on 10.3.2025. It is in aforesaid circumstances that the present application has been moved for expeditious disposal of the complaint filed by the applicant. 4. In support of his submission learned counsel for the applicant has submitted hat as per Section 143 (2) it has been provided that trial in this section shall be conducted as expeditiously as possible and endeavor shall be made to conclude the trial within a period of six months from the date of filing of the complaint. 5. From a bare perusal of the aforesaid provisions it is clear that undoubtedly, the trial has to be conducted expeditiously and endeavor should be made to conclude the trial within six months from the date of filing of the complaint. Aforesaid provision clearly indicates that time limit for conclusion of a trial is clearly directory and not mandatory. Apart from the above, considering the aforesaid provision, we find that summons have been issued and the opposite party No.2 has not put in appearance. Lastly, on 20.1.2025 even the applicant did not appear before the trial court and accordingly apart from the aforesaid considering that in the matter summons have been issued only in September, 2024, no ground for interference is made out. Also, considering that there is huge pendency in the courts of Judicial Magistrates who have been dealing with the matters under Section 138 of N.I.Act, no direction for expediting the trial can be issued at this stage. 6. Subsequently, in case the applicant feels that the trial is unduly being delayed, liberty is granted to him to move appropriate application before the trial court itself, which shall consider and dispose of the said application with expedition whenever the same is filed. 7. Subject to aforesaid direction, the application under Section 483 Cr.P.C. stands disposed of. (Alok Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 19.3.2025 RKM. Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench