Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:38085 Court No. - 73 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 7681 of 2025 Applicant :- Neeraj Gupta Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Goyal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Sri Shubham Kumar (AOR No.A/S 1838/2022), holding brief of Sri Ashish Goyal, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Abhishek Tripathi, learned AGA for the State. 2. This is an application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. to quash the entire criminal proceedings of Complaint Case No.1670 of 2017, (Shyambeer Singh Bhadauriya vs. Sangeeta Gupta), under Section 138 N.I. Act, Police Station Etmaddaula, District Agra pending before the court of Additional Civil Judge, (J.D.)/F.T.C. Agra. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the opposite party no.2 had filed a complaint on 5.10.2017 wherein allegation was to the effect that certain amounts were demanded by the applicant from the opposite party no.2 and for the purposes of surety a cheque of Rs.25/- lakhs was drawn however, when the opposite party no.2 deposited the said cheque then it was dishonoured on 5.9.2017 with the remark " account closed", a legal notice stood issued by the opposite party no.2 on 8.9.2017 resulting to the complaint. He further submits that the applicant never issued cheque after closing the bank account as the applicant had already closed the bank account on 21.3.2017. He also submits that the applicant has been falsely roped in. 4. Learned AGA on the other hand submits that the issues which the applicant seeks to raise are factual in nature which cannot be gone into in the present proceedings at this stage. 5. Considering the submissions so made across the bar the sole question which arises for consideration is the extent of judicial intervention at this stage. Apparently, whatever argument is being sought to be canvassed is factual in nature which cannot be gone into the at this stage as the same is subject matter of trial. Accordingly, no case is made for interference. The application is rejected. 6. At this juncture, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant shall be preferring appropriate application for seeking bail. 7. In the opinion of the Court, once the appropriate application is preferred, this Court has no reason to disbelieve that the same shall be decided with most expedition. Order Date :- 18.3.2025 piyush Digitally signed by :- PIYUSH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad