HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9895 of 2025 Court No. - 16 HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record. In view of the order proposed to be passed, issuance of notice to opposite party no.2 is dispensed with. 2. The present application has been filed for the following main prayers: "WHEREFORE, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow this instant petition under section-482 of Cr. P.C. Now Under Section-528 of B.N.S.S., 2023 and set aside/quash the impugned order dated 01.10.2022 passed by the court of learned 4th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raebareli in Case No. 725 of 2014 (Mahfooz Ali Versus Pramila Singh) Under Section-138 of N.I. Act, Police Station-Shivgarh, District-Raebareli and also set-aside the impugned revisional court's order dated 30.06.2025 passed by the court of learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, Gangster Act, Raebareli in Revision No. 14/2023 (Pramila Singh Versus Mahfooz Ali), in the interest of justice. It is further prayed that kindly stay the further proceedings of aforesaid criminal case, during the pendency of the present petition, in the interest of justice." 3. It is the case of the applicant that the impugned order passed by the court of 4th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raebareli in Case no.725 of 2014 (Mahfoos Ali vs. Pramila Singh) under Section 138 of the N.I. Act is Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shishir Pradhan Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Smt. Pramila Devi .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) bad in law. The statement of the complainant Mahfoos Ali was recorded under Section 244 Cr.P.C. and the trial under Section 138 of N.I. Act is a summary trial but the court below has fixed the case for proceedings under Section 313 Cr.P.C. statement. It has been submitted that the applicant is unable to get opportunity to produce her defence, hence, there is violation of principles of natural justice. The applicant had challenged the said order before the court below in revision, which too was dismissed on the wrong legal premise. It has been submitted that in N.I.Act, trial is governed with the provisions of Sections 251 to 259 Cr.P.C. and the application moved under Section 244 Cr.P.C. was liable to be allowed. 4. A bare perusal of Section 254 Cr.P.C. indicates that the same is available to prosecution side as well as accused side for taking evidences. The accused has ample opportunity to rebut the evidences under Section 313 Cr.P.C. Whatever evidences of the prosecution are recorded, the accused will have ample opportunity to rebut the same under Section 313 Cr.P.C. Therefore, there is need to read Sections 254 and 313 Cr.P.C. conjointly. The accused applicant would get sufficient opportunity to rebut the evidences and he can also prove his innocence by producing the evidences. Therefore, no interference is required in the matter. 5. The application is dismissed. November 21, 2025 Sachin A482 No. 9895 of 2025 2 (Brij Raj Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MEHROTRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench