Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:115811 Court No. - 75 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 22571 of 2025 Applicant :- Ankit Mishra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Trivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Sri Deepak Kumar Pandey (AOR No.A/D0461/23) holding brief of Sri Arvind Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vikas Sharma, learned State Law Officer for the State. 2. This is an application filed under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. for quashing the entire proceeding of complaint case no. 26117 of 2023 (Ankit Yadav Versus Ankit Mishra) under section 138 Negotiable Instrument Act police Station Chakeri District Kanpur Nagar as well as summoning order dated 18.07.2023 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate II Kanpur Nagar pending before the Metropolitan Magistrate, II 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 25.1.2023 under Section 138 of the N.I. Act with an allegation that with respect to discharge of a liability the applicant herein had drawn a cheque bearing no.489059 of an amount of Rs.20 lakhs on 8.9.2022 which on presentation in the bank was dishonoured with the remark alteration in date/figures/words on 18.10.2022 and on the assurance of the opposite party no.2 again the cheque was presented on 8.12.2022 against the same was dishonoured with the same reason, a statutory demand notice was issued on 22.12.2022 followed by a complaint on 25.1.2023 thereafter the applicant came to be summoned on 18.7.2023. He has further submitted that the summoning order cannot be sustained for more than one reason firstly, the cheque stood dishonoured on the ground of alteration in date/figures/words which does not answer the description of debt and liability under Section 138 of the N.I. Act and secondly the statutory demand notice is stated to be dated 22.12.2022 but the date of service has been shown to be 2.12.2021. 4. Learned State Law Officer on the other hand submits that the summoning order is dated 18.7.2023 and further annexure-8 at page 127 of the paper book happens to be the reference whereof has been made in paragraph no. 24 happens to be an application under Section 251 Cr.P.C. along with an affidavit filed by applicant on 30.1.2025 wherein various grounds were taken including obtaining of forensic handwriting report also. He further submits that once the applicant himself is contesting the trial then it is for the applicant to take all the differences. 5. Having heard the submissions so made across the bar and after perusing the record, the Court finds that the post dishonour of the cheque, a complaint stood lodged on 18.7.2023 the applicant was summoned. Further there happens to be at page 127 of the paper book an application filed by the applicant under Section 251 of the Cr.P.C. along with an affidavit dated 30.1.2025 for getting handwriting expert and forensic expert of the cheque in question. 6. 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 :- 17.7.2025 piyush Digitally signed by :- PIYUSH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad