Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:83136 Court No. - 73 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 17642 of 2025 Applicant :- Rajkumar Tewatiya Opposite Party :- State Of Uttar Pradesh Through Principal Secretary Home, Lucknow And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Adarsh Srivastava,Reena Pal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Sri Adarsh Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Vikas Sharma, learned State Law Officer for the State/opposite party no.1. 2. This application under Section 528 of the BNSS has been filed by the applicant to quash the summoning order dated 2.2.2013 as well as entire proceedings in Complaint Case No.2433 of 2029, under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Special Court N.I. Act, Ghaziabad. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the complaint was lodged by the opposite party no.2 on 21.8.2012 against the applicant under Section 138 of the N.I. Act with an allegation that cheque bearing no.775287 for an amount of Rs.4,50,000/- was drawn under the signature of the applicant as an authorised signatory for Udhyam Buildwell Private Limited on 22.6.2012 which came to be dishonoured on 25.6.2012 and a demand notice was issued on 20.7.2012 and the complaint came to be filed on 21.8.2012, thereafter the applicant has been summoned on 2.2.2023 under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. He has further submitted that the complaint as well as summoning order cannot be sustained for the simple reason that the company has not been arraigned as a party in the complaint and the applicant has been summoned in his individual capacity not in the capacity of the Director. He also submits that there is no compliance of Section 141 of the N.I. Act. 4. Learned State Law Officer on the other hand submits that first of all the summoning order dated 2.2.2013 has been challenged in the year 2025. He further submits that the proceedings are underway and thus in absence of setting forth any plausible explanation for inordinate and unexplained delay this Court may not interfere at this stage. 5. I have heard the submissions so made across the bar. Apparently, with reference to the dishonour of the cheque, the complaint had been lodged under Section 138 of the N.I. Act and the applicant has been summoned on 2.2.2013. On a pointed query being raised to the learned counsel for the applicant as to what is the stage of the proceeding according to him the evidences are to be led shortly. Since in the entire application there is no plausible explanation worth consideration for a delay of approximately 12 years in approaching this court, this Court does not find it appropriate to interfere at this stage. However, the legal and factual question which the applicant seeks to raise before the court below and the Court has no reason to disbelieve that the same shall be considered in a correct perspective. 6. With the present observation, the present application under Section 528 BNSS stands disposed of. Order Date :- 19.5.2025 piyush Digitally signed by :- PIYUSH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad