HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 25877 of 2025 Court No. - 76 HON'BLE VIKRAM D. CHAUHAN, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State. 2. This application has been filed by applicant for setting aside the impugned summoning order dated 14.06.2023 passed by learned Civil Judge, Junior Division 1st, Civil Court, Chandauli in Complaint Case No.19775 of 2023 under Section 138 N.I. Act, P. S. Chandauli, District Chandauli (Vishwabher V/s Kosendra Kumar Singh) and entire Complaint Case No.19775 of 2023 under Section 138 N.I. Act, P.S. Chandauli, District Chandauli (Vishwambher V/s Kosendra Kumar Singh) pending in the court of Civil Judge, Junior Division 1st, Civil Court, Chandauli. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for applicant that opposite party no.2 and applicant were having good relationship and were jointly working in business. Learned counsel for applicant submits that the cheque in question was never given by applicant to opposite party no.2 nor the same was signed. Opposite party no.2 has obtained the said cheque from the applicant and misuse the same by presenting the bank without knowledge of the applicant. It is also submitted by learned counsel for applicant that there is no signature on the aforesaid cheque and the cheque is required to be sent to the hand writing expert. Learned counsel for applicant further submits that present proceedings are not tenable and the applicant has denied in statement under Section 251 Cr.P.C. 4. It is to be seen that in the present case, the dispute involved is of Rs.15,62,000/- of the cheque. The cheque in question has not been annexed along with the present petition. It is further to be seen that the issues raised Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ranjeet Asthana Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Kosendra Kumar Singh .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) by applicant that the applicant has not signed the cheque nor given the same to opposite party no.2 are question of fact, which cannot be gone into under Section 528 BNSS. The aforesaid are triable issue and the evidence has to be led by the parties. 5. It is further to be noted that in view of Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, there is presumption in favour of opposite party no.2, which applicant is required to dispel at the stage of trial. So far as prayer of applicant that the disputed signature be sent to hand writing expert. On a query being made to learned counsel for applicant as to whether any application has been filed before the court concerned for sending the disputed signature to hand writing expert, learned counsel for applicant fairly submits that no such application has been filed before the trial court. 6. Once application has not been filed before the trial court for sending the disputed signature to the hand writing, this Court cannot at first instance direct the sending of disputed signature to the hand writing expert. It is further to be seen that in statement under Section 251 Cr.P.C. of applicant, it has not been stated by applicant that the signature on the cheque in question does not belong to applicant. Therefore, at this stage, this Court cannot presume the defence raised by the applicant for the first time before this Court. 7. The application under Section 528 BNSS lacks merit and is, dismissed, accordingly. October 9, 2025 D. Tamang NA528 No. 25877 of 2025 2 (Vikram D. Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- DHIRENDRA TAMANG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad