Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:42316 Court No. - 73 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 4643 of 2025 Applicant :- Anuruddh Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Sri Sunil Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Vikas Sharma learned State Law Officer. 2. This is an application filed U/s 528 BNSS for quashing the entire proceeding along with summoning order dated 24.09.2024 passed by Judicial Magistrate Etah in Complaint Case No. 12430 of 2023 (Ram Avtar Singh Anuruddh Kumar) U/s 138 of N.I. P.S. Kotwali, District Etah pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Etah. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that a complaint stood lodged on 14.06.2023 against the applicant regarding dishonouring of cheque dated 24.02.2023 amounting to Rs. 2 lac bearing no. 397765 where it was presented in the bank on 12.05.2023, the same stood dishonoured on 15.05.2023. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that as per the averments contained in the complaint reference paragraph-8, the notice came to be issued on 18.05.2023 but the same is factually incorrect. Particularly, when on 12.10.2023 the Magistrate rejected the complaint on the premise that the cheque was dated 24.02.2023 and as per the document of the bank, stood dishonoured on 24.02.2023 itself beyond the statutory period, the legal notice have been sent. He submits that against the order dated 12.10.2023 rejecting the complaint of opposite party no.2, the opposite party no.2 preferred a revision no. 282 of 2023 which came to be allowed on 13.08.2024 pursuant whereto now summoning order has been issued on 24.09.2024. Learned counsel for the applicant has invited the attention of the court towards page-47 of the paper book being a cheque dated 24.02.2023 of an amount of Rs. 2 lac issued in favour of opposite party no.2 bearing no. 397765 and while inviting the attention of the court towards page 48 of the paper book, it is contended that the document of the bank showing dishonouring is also dated 24.02.2023 thus, the complaint preferred on 18.05.2023 was beyond the statutory period. He submits that the revisional court has not considered the said aspect of the matter and has totally disregarded the order rejecting the complaint which was passed in earlier occasion. 4. Learned State Law Officer on the other hand submits that the revisional court has dealt with the said issue while recording of the finding that once the cheque stood present for encashment on 12.05.2023 and the same stood dishonoured on 15.05.2023 then there is no question for dishonouring of the cheque on 24.02.2023. He further submits that a categorical finding has been recorded which has not been questioned in the revisioinal proceeding despite the fact that adequate opportunity was accorded to the applicant. 5. Having heard the submissions made across the bar, the sole question which arises for consideration is the extent for judicial intervention at the present stage in the present proceeding. Apparently, the complaint preferred by the opposite party no.2 stood rejected against which a revision has been preferred which came to be allowed on 13.08.2024 wherein a specific issue was raised by the opposite party no.2 that dishonouring of the cheque was not on 24.02.2023 but was the same was on 15.05.2023 when the same was presented in the bank for encashment on 12.05.2023 and the said aspect has not been disputed by the fact that the applicant has participated in the said proceeding. He further submits that the revisional order has also not been the subject matter of challenge. Accordingly, no case is made out and the present application is hereby rejected. Order Date :- 21.3.2025 C. MANI (Vikas Budhwar,J.) Digitally signed by :- CHANDRAMANI VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad