Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:116110 Court No. - 75 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 24924 of 2025 Applicant :- Prem Lata Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Sri Manoj Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Moti Lal, learned A.G.A. 2. This is an application under Section 528 of BNSS preferred by the applicant for quashing the impugned order dated 29.10.2024 and impugned summoning order dated 7.05.2022 including the entire proceedings of Complaint No. 2571/2019 (Manish Kumar vs. Prem Lata), under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, Police Station-Cantt, District-Gorakhpur pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-First, Gorakhpur. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant happens to be the wife of O.P. No.2, however, owing to matrimonial discord, proceedings under Section 125 of CrPC came to be instituted by the applicant, which came to be allowed on 12.10.2022 with a direction for payment of compensation, further alleging that the applicant had taken certain amount from O.P. No.2/husband, in order to discharge liability, the applicant had drawn a cheque dated 02.03.2019 of Rs.50,000/-, which came to be dishonoured on 31.05.2019 following by a statutory demand notice dated 29.06.2019 followed by a complaint and the applicant came to be summoned on 07.07.2022. Submission is that even, FIR was also lodged on 09.01.2019 by the O.P. No.2 against the applicant under Sections 406, 504, 506 IPC and further proceedings under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act had also been drawn. Submission is that the applicant herein had been thrown out from her matrimonial house in the year 2018, thus there was no occasion to have drawn a cheque, particularly when the entire cheque, which was signed was in the matrimonial house was misutilized. 4. Learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that whatever might be, once the cheque stood drawn, the presumption under Section 139 N.I. Act would be there in favour of the holder. 5. Having heard the submissions so made across the Bar and after perusing the record, the sole question which arises for determination is the extent of judicial intervention. 6. Apparently, the cheque stood drawn which was dishonouored. The question as to whether the cheque was available with the O.P. No.2/husband in the matrimonial house and the same was misutilized and the parties are litigating between each other due to discordant atmosphere is concerned, the same may not be a relevant factor to be considered at the stage of summoning, particularly when the same at best can be said to be a defence, consideration whereof would already arise, when the trial commences. Presumption under Section 139 of the N.I. Act would always be there in favour of the holder. Accordingly interference is declined. 7. The application is disposed of leaving it open for the applicant to tale all the legal and factual issues while contesting the trial and the Court has no reason to disbelieve that the same shall be considered in correct perspective. 8. With the aforesaid observations, the application is disposed of. Order Date :- 17.7.2025 N.S.Rathour (Vikas Budhwar, J) Digitally signed by :- NIPENDRA SINGH RATHOUR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad