Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:73141 Court No. - 73 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 528 of 2025 Applicant :- Devdas Opposite Party :- State Of Uttar Pradesh And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Sri Akhilesh Kumar Rajbhar, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Vikas Sharma, learned State Law Officer for the State. 2. This is an application u/s 482 of CrPC preferred by the applicant for quashing the order dt. 09.12.2024. passed by Special Court (138 N.I. Act) PH-II, Gautambudh Nagar in Case no. 267 of 2022 (Keshari Singh Vs. Devdas) u/s 138 N.I. Act, Police Station-Phase- 2, Noida, Distt-Gautambudh Nagar. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that a complaint under Section 138 of N.I. Act was lodged by O.P. No.2 against the applicant on 18.10.2016 regarding dishonouring of the cheques. The applicant was summoned. Thereafter the applicant preferred an application under Section 91 of the CrPC for summoning to produce documents on record. The said application has been rejected by virtue of the order dated on 09.12.2024 by the Special Court (138 N.I. Act) PH-II, Gautambudh Nagar. 4. Questioning the said order, the applicant has preferred the present application. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the application so preferred under Section 91 of CrPC was liable to be allowed, as the documents which was sought to be produced had material bearing on the issue in question and by failing to acceed to the request of the applicant, miscarriage of justice has been done. 5. Learned State Law Officer submits that from the perusal of the order dated 09.12.2024, rejecting the said application, it would reveal that several dates have already been fixed for arguments and defence evidence has also been adduced and there was no ground for summoning the witness as sought under Section 91 of the CrPC. 6. In the opinion of the Court, as apparent from the order dated 09.12.2024, already the defence evidence has been adduced and seven dates have been fixed for arguments. However, there is nothing on record to suggest even worth consideration that there was a justifiable ground in not approaching the Court earlier while moving an application under Section 91 of CrPC. Moreover, the trial is to be decided on the strength of the documents available on record. 7. Accordingly no good ground is made out for interference in the proceedings at this stage. The application is rejected. However, it is open for the applicants to take all pleas, which are available to him. Order Date :- 7.5.2025 N.S.Rathour (Vikas Budhwar, J) Digitally signed by :- NIPENDRA SINGH RATHOUR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad