Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:145270 Court No. - 75 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 31125 of 2025 Applicant :- Shivendra Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Sri Rakesh Yadav learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ram Awadh Maurya, 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 Summoning order dated 18.06.2019 in Complaint Case No. 1371 of 2019 (M/s Pantnagar Tarai Agro Seeds Vs M/s Ankur Udhyam) under Section 138 N.I. Act, Police Station-Bilashpur, District-Rampur, pending in the court Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate second, Rampur. 3. The case of the applicant is that a complaint stood lodged by the opposite party no.2 on 1.4.2019 against the applicant under the Section 138 of the N.I. Act with an allegation that the opposite party no.2 had supplied certain amount of Rs.14,52,750/- and the applicant herein with respect to discharge of the liability and paid an amount of Rs.11,00,000/- and had drawn a cheque bearing no.185098 of Rs.3,50,000/- dated 3.11.2018 which on presentation in the bank came to be dishonoured on 1.2.2019, followed by a statutory demand notice dated 28.2.2019 thereafter the applicant came to be summoned on 18.6.2019, under Section 138 of the N.I. Act by the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rampur. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the post issuance of the summoning order the applicant has obtained bail on 24.3.2025 and the applicant seeks to contest the proceedings. According to the learned counsel for the applicant the applicant be granted liberty to raise the legal plea with respect to the fact as per the statements contained in para 4 of the application of the complaint, the applicant had paid Rs.40,000/- and thus in view of the provisions contained under Section 56 of the N.I. Act the applicant is entitled for the benefit of the same with regard to endorsement of the part of the some due while referring to the judgement in Dashrathbhai Trikambhai Patel vs Hitesh Mahendrabhai Patel & another 2022 Law Suit (SC) 1202 so as to contend that the total amount due as reflected in the cheque would not be the amount due on maturity particularly when part payment has already been made. He has also submitted that the applicant shall raise all the legal and factual issues including the fact that there happens to be no legal debt or liability or relationship either personal or business with the applicant. 5. Learned State Law Officer has no objection to the same. 6. Accordingly, no case is made out for interference, the application stands disposed of granting liberty to the applicant to take all legal and factual grounds which are available under law while contesting the trial and this Court has no reasons to disbelieve that the same shall be considered with most expedition in correct perspective. Order Date :- 22.8.2025 piyush Digitally signed by :- PIYUSH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad