Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:24811 Court No. - 12 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 483 No. - 349 of 2025 Applicant :- Ms. S.N. Jewellers Thru. Prop. Sooraj Narayan @ Suraj Narayan Agrawal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. The Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. on behalf of the State and perused the material available on record. 2. It has been submitted on behalf of the applicant that opposite party no. 2 had purchased silver jewellery from the shop of applicant and had given a cheque no. 015672 amounting to Rs.18,70,000/- (Rs. Eighteen Lacs and Seventy Thousands only). When the same was presented before the Bank for encashment, it was dishonoured due to insufficient fund. 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 the complaint was registered on 06.02.2021 and summons were issued firstly on 02.09.2024 and date was fixed for 17.03.2025 and further date was also fixed on 22.04.2025. 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 case was fixed on 17.03.2025 and thereafter on 22.04.2025 and apart from the aforesaid considering that in the matter summons have been issued only on 02.09.2024, 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 :- 30.4.2025 Virendra Digitally signed by :- VIRENDRA KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench