HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10139 of 2025 Court No. - 16 HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned AGA appearing on behalf of State-opposite party no.1. 2. In view of the order proposed to be passed, issuance of notice to opposite party no.2 is dispensed with. 3. The present application has been filed seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No.58697 of 2021, Jitendra Pandey Vs. Vaibhav Singh, and the order dated 03.12.2021 passed by the Additional Court, Court No.5, Lucknow. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant had informed the Bank on 01.06.2021 that his cheque book may be cancelled and no payment would be made in favour of anyone. He further submits that opposite party no.2 submitted the cheque on 30.06.2021, which was dis- honoured i.e. after the information given by the applicant in the bank. He also submits that there is allegation that opposite party no.2 had given some amount though RTGS to the applicant, but the applicant has not received any amount through RTGS. 5. Learned AGA, on the other hand, has submitted that the Magistrate after going through the complaint, statement of the complainant recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and the evidence available on record, issued summons against the applicant, therefore, no interference is required by Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shashi Saurabh Tiwari, Vivek Bhooshan Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Vaibhav Singh .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) this Court, 6. The record reveals that for the transaction, Cheque No.002679 dated 25.06.2021 pertaining to Rs.30,00,000/- was issued by the applicant in favour of opposite party no.2 and on presentation of the said cheque in the Bank, it was dis-honoured with the remark that “insufficient funds” on 01.07.2021. Thereafter, legal notice was sent to the applicant on 22.07.2021 and the complaint was filed within time. Statement of the complainant was recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and after going through the complaint, statement under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and the evidence available on record, issued summons against the applicant. Therefore, there is no illegality or infirmity in the order passed by the trial court. 7. Application is devoid of merit. It is accordingly rejected. December 1, 2025 Rao/- A482 No. 10139 of 2025 2 (Brij Raj Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- CHEBROLU SRINIVASA RAO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench