Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:114452 Court No. - 75 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 21647 of 2025 Applicant :- Akash Srivastava Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Kunwar Mayank Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Sri Kunwar Mayank Singh learned counsel for the applicant and Sri J.P. Gupta learned AGA for the State. 2. This is an application filed under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. for quashing the summoning order dated 19.08.2021 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate, Court No.3, Fatehpur in Complaint Case No. 3000 of 2020, Uma Srivastava Versus Akash Srivastava, under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, Police Station- Kotwali, District-Fatehpur. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that a complaint stood lodged by the opposite party no.2 on 8.5.2020 against the applicant under Section 138 of the N.I. Act with an allegation that the opposite party no.2 use to run Grahak Sewa Kendra and due to her illness the nephew of the opposite party no.2, the applicant herein was interested with the job to conduct the said business, however, the allegation has set out with the complaint is that huge misappropriation was done pursuant whereto on the complaint, the applicant herein had drawn cheques which on presentation in the bank stood dishonoured followed by a statutory notice when the complaint and the applicant due to the summoned on 19.8.2021. He has further submitted that the applicant is innocent and no offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act stands attracted as there is no legal debt or liability. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has invited attention the first information report lodged by S.B.I. against the opposite party no.2 and the name of the applicant also stood surfaced and a charge sheet was submitted against the applicant and the applicant thereafter preferred an Application U/S 482 No.29677 of 2024, Akash Srivastava vs. State of U.P. and another in which on 5.9.2024 the applicant has been accorded interim protection. 5. Submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant post enlargement on bail had also instituted proceedings under Section 173(4) of the B.N.S.S. against the opposite party no.2 in which summons have been issued on 18.3.2025. Further submission is that the summoning order cannot be sustained. 6. Learned AGA on the other hand submits that once the cheque stood drawn and it was dishonoured then the presumption under Section 139 of the N.I. Act would be there. 7. Having heard the submissions so made across the bar, the sole question which arises for determination is the extent of judicial intervention at this stage. Apparently, as per the allegation the cheque stood drawn which has been dishonoured. In absence of pointing out of any legal infirmity or any infraction of the provisions under Section 138 Act read with Section 142 of the N.I. Act. No case for interference is made out. However, whatever arguments are being raised they are the matter of defences consideration whereof would arise post raising of the same when the trial commences. 8. Accordingly, interference is declined, application stands disposed of leaving it open to the applicant to raise all legal and factual issues before the court below while contesting the trial and this Court has no reasons to disbelieve that the same shall be considered in accordance with law. Order Date :- 16.7.2025 piyush Digitally signed by :- PIYUSH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad