SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS C482 No.148 of 2023 Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. Mr. Karan Anand, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Ramji Shrivastava, learned counsel for the respondent. 3. By means of present C482 application, petitioner has put to challenge the summoning order dated 30.04.2022 passed in Criminal Case No.3971 of 2021, Vishal Aggarwal vs. Smt. Ritu Sharma, under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act passed by the 4th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun as well as the entire proceeding of the aforesaid criminal case. 4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the cheque, in question in the complaint case, was issued on 20.07.2021 by the applicant in favour of Vishal Aggarwal, and the memo of dishonour of Cheque was issued on 19.07.2021 at 12:00 AM. 5. A very limited argument has been advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that in a situation where the cheque itself was issued on 20.07.2021, the memo of its dishonour cannot be issued prior to its issuance i.e. 19.07.2021. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has taken this Court to pages 28 and 30 of the paper book of present C482 application. 7. I have perused the documents relied upon by the learned counsel for the applicant. 8. In reply to the arguments advanced by learned Counsel for the applicant, learned Counsel for the respondent-informant has filed supplementary affidavit on 29.07.2024. Annexure No.2 of the said affidavit is the certificate issued by the Federal Bank where the cheque was presented for its encashment. The said document reflects that the memo of dishonour of cheque was issued on 20.07.2021. 9. Having considered the rival contentions of the parties and having gone through the documents available on record, this Court is not impressed by the arguments so advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. However, it is yet to be decided by the trial court, after appreciating the evidence, as to what would be the effect of these documents. 10. Accordingly, there is no point in keeping this C482 pending. The same is accordingly dismissed. 11. It is, however, observed that any observation made hereinabove shall not come in the way of trial Court to separately appreciate the dispute in question. (Pankaj Purohit J.) 28.04.2025 Ravi