Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:23619 Court No. - 12 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3389 of 2025 Applicant :- Kamla Prasad Navik Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shivam Srivastava,Prashant Singh Gaur,Rahul Kumar Shukla,Sudhanshu Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Heard Sri Rahul Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. on behalf of the State. 2. By means of the present petition the petitioner has challenged the proceedings of complaint case No.5944 of 2018 (Chandrashekhar Sonkar Vs. Kamla Prasad Navik) pending before Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court No.12, Lucknow under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 relating to police station Vikas Nagar, Lucknow. 3. It has been submitted that the petitioner is a businessman living in Lucknow with family and had taken loan from opposite party No.2 for the purpose of setting up tea business on mutual terms. It has been stated that to secure the said loan the petitioner had given five cheques drawn on Corporation Bank and Syndicate Bank to the complainant each for an amount of Rs.1,00,000/-. It has been submitted that despite the entire amount having been paid and there having been no legally enforceable liability still respondent No.2 presented the said cheques fraudulently which were dishonored pursuant to which application under Section 138 N.I.Act were filed. 4. It has been further stated that the address of the petitioner was shown as S-2/317 Sector F, Jankipuram, Lucknow and accordingly neither the summons could be served upon the petitioner nor could he appear before the trial court and due to non - appearance of the petitioner non bailable warrants were issued against him. This fact came to his knowledge from another proceedings pending in another court. He submits that process under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. have also been initiated against the petitioner. In light of the aforesaid facts it has been submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to appear before the trial court and oppose the claim made by the complainant. 5. Considering the aforesaid facts and also the fact that coercive processes have been issued against the petitioner for non appearance before the trial court only on account of the fact that address of the petitioner in the complaint was incorrectly shown and also that the petitioner is willing to appear in the trial court, the orders dated 27.1.2023 and 11.12.2023 are set aside. 6. The petitioner is directed to appear before the trial court within next ten days and move appropriate application for bail which may be decided in view of law laid down by Supreme Court in "Satender Kumar Antil versus Central Bureau of Investigation and another, Special Leave to Appeal (Cri)No.5191 of 2021". 7. In case, the petitioner does not appear before the trial court the benefits of this order shall not be available to him. 8. With aforesaid observation and direction the petition stands disposed of. (Alok Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 24.4.2025 RKM. Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench