Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:31373 Court No. - 79 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 2097 of 2025 Petitioner :- Sandeep Mittal Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Madhav Jain,Murari Lal Jain Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J. 1. Heard Sri Madhav Jain, learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner and learned AGA for the State. 2. Present petition has been preferred with the following prayers:- "i) Issue suitable order or direction to set aside judgment and order dated 27.11.2024 passed by the Additional Session Judge, Court no. 8, Agra in Criminal Revision no. 302 of 2022 and also order dated 24.05.2022 passed by the Additional Judge (Court no. 2), Agra in Complaint Case no. 7296 of 2021 (Sandeep Mittal versus Pawan Singh Khirwar)." 3. Since the orders impugned are passed by learned courts at the stage of maintainability of complaint under Section 138 N.I. Act and as such process of issuing notice to respondent no. 2 is hereby dispensed with. 3. The instant petition has been preferred for challenging the order dated 24.05.2022 passed by Presiding Officer, Additional Judge, Court no. 2, Agra along with order dated 27.11.2024 passed by learned court of Additional Sessions Judge, Court no. 8, Agra passed in Criminal Revision no. 302 of 2020 (Sandeep Mittal vs. State of U.P. and others). 4. It is case of the petitioner that a cheque has been received from respondent no. 2 which was issued by Andhra Bank, T.T. Nagar Branch, Bhopal and the same was presented for extension of Rs.1,15,00,000/- at Punjab National Bank, Babdia Kalan, Gul Mohar, Bhopal since petitioner is having savings bank account no. 0984000100251525 at Punjab National Bank, Ram Bagh, Agra. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the instrument issued in favour of the petitioner was payable at par at all branches, meaning thereby the same can be presented before any Bank in which the petitioner was having his account and the instrument shall be honored by every branch of Andhra Bank situated at any place. 5. As per the factum of the case, after receiving of dishonored cheque due to block of account the cause of action rises in his favour for preferring application under Section 138 N.I. Act at Agar itself but the same has been denied by learned concerned court which culminated into order dated 24.05.2022. The reasoning recorded and finding returned with the learned concerned court is that the jurisdiction of the matter pertains to Bhopal not at Agra since the cheque has been issued from the concerned Bank which is situated at Bhopal and the same was presented at Bhopal itself and as such the petitioner is having no cause of action rises in his favour for preferring complaint under Section 138 N.I. Act at Agra. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the analogy drawn by learned concerned court is contrary to the settled procedure available at the banking side, once the instrument has been issued having specific denomination with the particular available over the instrument itself that the cheque is payable at part at all branches then the finding recorded by learned concerned court is highly illegal. The same stand has been taken up by learned counsel for the petitioner at the time of preferring criminal revision no. 302 of 2022 before learned court of Additional Sessions Judge, Court no. 8, Agra but no credence has been given and the same was also dismissed vide order dated 27.11.2024 which impugned the present petition. 7. Per contra, learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer as made in the petition and rebutted the stand taken up by learned counsel for petitioner and submitted that the finding recorded by both the learned courts are perfectly legal since the cheque has been issued from the Bank pertaining to Bhopal and the same cheque was presented for extension of the amount in favour of the petitioner at Bhopal itself and as such no cause of action available before the petitioner for preferring a complaint under Section 138 N.I Act at Agra. 8. After hearing the rival submissions extended by learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the opinion that the procedure for receiving amount either through instrument, card, credit card or other modes which are available as online transaction is only meant for simplifying the banking procedure and amenable for the customer and user and to be as simple as possible without having any hurdle to get the transaction done at any branch available in the country as well as outside of the country. Once the specific instrument is having specific wording "payable at par at all branches" it crystal clearly defines that the cheque can be presented anywhere before any branch where the instrument holder is having his account but so far as regarding the cause of action is concerned, the same was rightly chosen by the petitioner by way of preferring application under Section 138 NI Act at Agra since his savings bank account pertains to bank of Punjab National Bank at Agra itself and as such the finding recorded by both the learned courts are perverse. 9. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, order dated 24.05.2022 passed by Additional Judge, Court no. 2, Agra in Complaint Case no. 7296 of 2021 along with order dated 27.11.2024 passed by learned court of Additional Sessions Judge, Court no. 8, Agra in Criminal Revision no. 302 of 2020 are hereby set aside. Matter is remitted back to learned concerned court for deciding the same on merits after due compliance of the aforesaid order. 10. The instant petition stands allowed accordingly. Order Date :- 4.3.2025 Shaswat Digitally signed by :- SHASWAT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad