Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:75823 Court No. - 73 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 14160 of 2025 Applicant :- Ravindra Pal Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Sri Ashok Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri J.P. Gupta, learned AGA for the State/opposite party no.1. 2. This application under Section 482 Cr.PC. has been filed by the applicant to quash the the Summoning order dated 18.11.2024 passed by Additional Civil Judge (S.D.) Court No.6, Kanpur Nagar in Complaint Case No. 44373/2024, Govind Singh Vs. Ravindra Pal Singh, under section 138 Negotiable Instrument Act, P.S. Sachendi, District Kanpur Nagar. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that a complaint was lodged by the opposite party no. 2 against the applicant on 06.06.2024 with an allegation that a cheque bearing no. 079552 of an amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- dated 15.02.2024 was drawn by the applicant which on presentation in the Bank was dishonoured on 04.05.2024, a statutory notice was issued on 06.05.2024 which is stated to have been served upon the applicant on 08.05.2024 and the complaint was filed on 06.06.2024 and the applicant has been summoned under Section 138 of the N.I. Act on 18.11.2024. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there is no legally enforceable debt attracted upon the applicant for the simple reason that prior lodging of the said complaint, the applicant have already been lodged a complaint under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. on 03.05.2024 against one Samsher Singh, Anand Singh, Govind Singh and four unnamed person regarding a loot and dacoity in his house. Submission is that the cheques were also stolen which has been miss-utilized and while entering the figures and words, the cheque has been presented in the Bank which stood dishonoured. 5. Learned AGA on the other hand submits that presumption under Section 139 of the N.I. Act is against the applicant in favour of the holder. 6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 7. I am of the opinion of the court, that there has been no procedural infirmity in non-compliance of provisions under Section 138 and 141 of the N.I. Act and further question as to whether the cheque was actually stolen and what would be ramification is a subject matter of trial and this Court is not required to delve into the said issue at this stage, particularly, in view of the provisions contained under Section 139 of the N.I. Act. Thus, interference is declined and the application is disposed of. 8. At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant submits that suitable direction be issued in light of the judgment in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another; decided on 07.10.2021 in S.L.P. No.5191 of 2021 with relation to enlargement on bail. 9. In the opinion of the Court, once a bail application is preferred then the same shall be considered with most expeditions strictly as per the law of the land without any delay. Order Date :- 9.5.2025 A. Prajapati Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH KUMAR PRAJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad