Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:70755 Court No. - 73 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 5915 of 2025 Applicant :- Mohd Haneef Khan @ Raju Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Krishna Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Sri Krishna Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri S.K. Singh, learned AGA for the State. 2. This is an application U/s 528 BNSS filed for quashing the entire proceeding of complaint case no. 53 of 2024 (Mukhtyar Ahmad vs. Mohd. Haneef alias Raju) under Section 138 of N.I. Act, P.S. Milak Khanam, District Rampur. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that a complaint was lodged by the opposite party no.2 on 09.01.2024 with relation to dishonouring of a cheque of an amount of Rs.78 lacs bearing no. 006250 on 21.11.2023 followed by a statutory demand notice on 29.11.2023 which came to be served upon the applicant on 01.12.2023. Thereafter on 09.02.2024 the Additional Civil Judge (J.D.) court no.3 Rampur in complaint case no.53 of 2024 proceeded to summon the applicant under Section 138 of N.I. Act. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that on 29.11.2024 submitted an application that the cognizance order be recalled/ dropped as there is no sufficient material so as to summon the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that as the matter of fact a bag containing the cheque and other valuable documents stood stolen/ misplaced when he was sitting in a tea stall and a complaint whereof was also lodged before the police and communication was also made to the bank regarding the same. However, opposite party no.2 has misutilised and maneuvered the entire things in his own favour and filled up the amount in words and figures in the signed cheque books and deposited the same in the bank pursuant to, it was dishonoured. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that there happens to be evidences to show that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated and it was not a case of summoning under Section 138 of N.I. Act as there was nothing to show about any enforceable debt or liability. He submits that the filing of the complaint before the police station as well as before the bank is prior to the lodging of the complaint. He seeks to rely upon the judgment passed by Delhi High Court in the case of SC Rastogi vs. Renu Kalra 2002 (CRILJ) 62269, K.M. Mathew vs. State of Kerala AIR SC 2206 so as to buttress the submission. 4. Learned AGA on the other hand submits that first of all as a matter of right, the proceedings with relation to summons cannot be dropped as the order summoning the accused is on the basis of the allegations contained in the complaint. He further submits that the court below had applied its mind by prima-facie being satisfied that the penal provisions are attracted and thus, no fault whatsoever attributed in this regard. He submits that the order dated 06.02.2025 rejecting the application preferred by the applicant on 19.11.2024 is perfectly in accordance with law particularly when only factual issues have been sought to be raised regarding misplacing of the bag containing cheques and other vital documents and misusing the cheques while filling up the figures and amount in words. 5. Having heard the submission made across the bar. Apparently, the applicant stood summoned on 09.02.2024, thereafter on 29.11.2024, an application stood preferred for dropping the proceeding. As a matter of fact, the entire basis of filing of the said application for dropping the proceedings emanates from factual issues regarding misplacing the cheque book and misutilisation of the cheque while filling up the amount figures in words. These are the mater of trial and the same may be at best a defence which can be seen at the time when the trial commences and at a stage where the court is to decide as to whether it is a case for conviction or acquittal. Moreover, it cannot be said on the basis of material available on record and the affidavits filed thereon that prima-facie the issue is not triable. The reliance and reference made in the case of S.C. Rastogi and K.M. Mathew (Supra) is of no aid and assistance and the present application is hereby rejected. Order Date :- 2.5.2025 C. MANI (Vikas Budhwar,J.) Digitally signed by :- CHANDRAMANI VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad