Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:78069 Court No. - 87 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 15508 of 2024 Applicant :- Smt Ramanpreet Kaur And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Pandey,Rahul Saxena Counsel for Opposite Party :- Brijesh Kumar Srivastava,G.A. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State, and Sri B.K. Srivastava, learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party no. 2. 2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants for quashing the summoning order dated 02.02.2024 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 7, Agra in Complaint Case No. 24242 of 2023 (Divya Devi @ Geeta vs. Smt. Ramanpreet Kaur and others) under Sections 406, 323, 452, 506 IPC, Police Station Kamla Nagar, District Agra, as well as the entire criminal proceedings arising therefrom. 3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that the complaint filed by the opposite party no. 2 is a counterblast to the legal notice dated 12.09.2023 and subsequent complaint filed by Ravinder Kaur, mother of applicant no. 1, under Sections 138 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tarn Taran, Punjab. It is submitted that the opposite party no. 2 had borrowed Rs. 13,00,000/- from applicant no. 1 and had issued four blank cheques as security, and that after default in repayment, proceedings under Sections 138 of the N.I. Act was initiated by the mother of applicant no. 1. Learned counsel further contends that the learned Magistrate has summoned the applicants in a mechanical manner without application of judicial mind and without recording any satisfaction as required under law. The complaint and summoning order lack legal foundation and are an abuse of the process of law. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2, Sri B.K. Srivastava, submits that no amount was returned by the applicants and that the complaint discloses sufficient grounds to proceed against them. He further contended that from perusal of the complaint it cannot be said that no prima facie case is made out against the applicant and the Court below has rightly summoned the applicant and no interference is required by this Court in the impugned order as well as the on going proceedings. 5. Heard counsels for the parties and perused the record. 6. Upon careful perusal of the complaint, statements recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., and the impugned summoning order, this Court finds that the learned Magistrate has passed the summoning order in a routine and mechanical manner, without recording any satisfaction as to the prima facie commission of the alleged offences by the applicants. The proceedings appear to be retaliatory in nature, especially in view of the prior legal notice and complaint lodged by the applicant's side. 7. Accordingly, the summoning order dated 02.02.2024 as well as the entire criminal proceedings of Complaint Case No. 24242 of 2023 ((Divya Devi @ Geeta vs. Smt. Ramanpreet Kaur and others) pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 7, Agra are hereby quashed. 8. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. stands allowed. Order Date :- 13.5.2025 pks Digitally signed by :- PANKAJ KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- PANKAJ KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad