HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8821 of 2025 Court No. - 16 HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned AGA for the State and perused the record. 2. 2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner with the prayer to quash the order dated 22.08.2025, passed by learned Incharge Sessions Judge, Balrampur in Criminal Revision No. 69/2025 (M/s P.K. Enterprises vs. State of U.P. and another) and order dated 31.07.2025 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate -IInd, Balrampur in Complaint Case No. 9890/2021 (M/s Shakti Agencies vs. M/s P.K. Enterprises) as well as quash the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 9890/2021 (M/s Shakti Agencies vs. M/s P.K. Enterprises), pending before court concerned, Balrampur and impugned summoning order dated 13.01.2022 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Balrampur in Complaint Case No. 9890/2021 (M/s Shakti Agencies vs. M/s P.K. Enterprises) contained as Annexure No.1, 2 and 3 respectively to this application , in the interest of justice. 3. The brief facts of the case are that as per the complaint version, dated 27.01.2017 the applicant and opposite party no.2 and one other Gyan Prakash Gupta, son of late Ram Chander, resident of Bhagwatiganj, District Balrampur, started a business and opposite party no.2 and Ram Chander have invested capital in the firm. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rajeev Kumar Mishra Rudra, Diwakar Prasad Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Pradeep Kumar Singh .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. And 2 Others .....Opposite Party(s) 4. On 6.9.2019 an FIR was registered against Harish Chandra Singh, Amresh Singh, Majhi, and Prabhat, under the order of the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gonda in pursuance of the application filed by the petitioner under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. and FIR was lodged in Case Crime No. 0691 of 2019, under Sections 417, 420, 467, 468, 471, 323, 506, 498-A, 392 and 406 IPC. 5. In the aforesaid case charge sheet was filed against Harish Chanda Singh, Amresh Pratap Singh, on 10.12.2021. In the said FIR, it is evident that the petitioner has signed 13 cheques, which were taken forcibly by the aforesaid persons. The opposite party no.2 moved an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. on 9.2.2021, in which he has made allegation that he had given cheques of amount of Rs. 62,76,012/-. The court below passed an order to treat the said case as complaint, however, the said complaint was withdrawn by opposite party no.2 on 16.7.2021. The opposite party no.2 again moved second time application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. on same set of facts, on 4.8.2021. In pursuance of the said application the court passed order for registering the FIR. The FIR was registered under Sections 406, 419, 420 IPC in case Crime No. 0257/2021. 6. It is further stated that the opposite party no.2 moved an application under Section 142 of N.I. Act on 28.9.2021, which is application under Section 138 N.I. Act against the the petitioner on the basis of legal notice sent by him. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that after recording the statements under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. the summons have been issued under the N.I. Act. The petitioner has appeared and has furnished the bail bonds in the aforesaid case. 7. The opposite party no.2 fled an application under Section 216 Cr.P.C. for altering charge under Sections 406, 415 and 420 IPC including Section 138 N.I. Act. In the reply of application dated 4.6.2022, the petitioner had filed objection on 23.2.2023. The opposite party no.2 filed reply on 20.3.2023 of the objection filed by the petitioner. The petitioner moved an application on 3.4.2025 for verifying the amount regarding the cheque. The said application has been rejected by the court below, vide order dated 31.07.2025. Against the order dated 31.7.2025, the petitioner A482 No. 8821 of 2025 2 preferred a criminal revision before the Sessions Judge, Balrampur, which has been rejected by the impugned order. 8. After going through the pleadings on record, it is clear that the proceeding under N.I. Act is pending and the petitioner has already appeared. He has to put forth his submission and lead evidence before the court below. This Court in exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot interfere in the case. 9. The application being devoid of merits, is accordingly dismissed. October 15, 2025 Muk A482 No. 8821 of 2025 3 (Brij Raj Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHD UMAR KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench