HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 39678 of 2025 Court No. - 76 HON'BLE VIKRAM D. CHAUHAN, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State. 2. This application has been filed by the applicant for quashing the impugned summoning order dated 17.07.2025 passed in Complaint Case No. 02 of 2025 (Rambha Singh Vs. Bindresh Kumar Maurya), under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Police Station Mungra Badshahpur, District Jaunpur, passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-Fourth, Jaunpur and to quash the entire proceeding of the Complaint Case No. 02 of 2025 (Rambha Singh Vs. Bindresh Kumar Maurya), under section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Acts, 1881, Police Station Mungra Badshahpur, District Jaunpur. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the cheque dated 21.10.2024 of Rs. 2,00,000/- was dishonoured. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that there was material alteration in the date of the cheque at the time in question and as such the cheque in question would be rendered invalid and the criminal proceedings would not be tenable. 4. It is to be seen that applicant is alleging that there is material alteration in the cheque which has rendered the cheque not negotiable instrument/invalid. Such an issue is a question of fact which cannot be decided under Section 528 BNSS. The plea raised by the applicant in the present application are in the nature of defence of applicant-accused. The defence version of events would require a trial. The defence evidence and Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ram Khelawan Patel Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Bindresh Kumar Maurya .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) arguments are meant to be presented and proved during the trial. It is now fairly settled that while exercising inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 BNSS or revisional jurisdiction under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in a case where complaint is sought to be quashed, it is not proper for the this Court to consider the defence of the accused or embark upon an enquiry in respect of merits of the accusations. The nature of plea raised by the Applicant are essentially questions of fact and required appreciation of facts, which this Court does not consider necessary to be considered at this stage as these facts are required to be proved by the applicant-accused before the trial court prior to the same being considered. 5. Accordingly, the present application under Section 528 BNSS is not tenable and as such is dismissed. The liberty is granted to learned counsel for the applicant to raise such issues before the trial court in accordance with law. October 14, 2025 VMA NA528 No. 39678 of 2025 2 (Vikram D. Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- VISHWA MOHAN ARORA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad