Disposed

Jitendra Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC1 Jul 2025NA528/16753/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application to quash a summoning order in a Section 138 cheque-dishonour complaint on the ground that it omitted recital of issuance and service of the statutory notice. The court set aside the order dated 09.05.2024 and remitted the matter to the court below for a fresh order in accordance with law.

What did the court decide?

Summoning order dated 09.05.2024 set aside; matter remitted to court below for a fresh order; certified copy to be submitted by 18.07.2025.

Jitendra Singh vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:101377

¶2

Court No. - 75

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 16753 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Jitendra Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv Sharan Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Shiv Sharan Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Indrajeet Singh Yadav, learned A.G.A.

¶7

This is an application under Section 528 of BNSS preferred by the applicant for quashing the summoning order dated 09.05.2024 as well as entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.274 of 2023, Satyavir Singh vs. Jitendra Singh, under Section 138 of N.I. Act, pending in the Court of Presiding Officer, Addl. Court, Aligarh.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that a complaint stood lodged by O.P. No.2 on 17.03.2023 under Section 138 of the N.I. Act with an allegation that with respect to discharge a liability, the applicant herein had drawn a cheque bearing number "333580" dated 15.12.2022 of an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- which as per the complaint came to be dishonoured on 31.01.2023 with the remark "payment stopped by the drawer" and thereafter a complaint was lodged and on 09.05.2024, the applicant has been summoned under Section 138 of N.I. Act. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the court below while summoning the applicant overlooked the crucial aspect of the matter, which goes to the root of the issue pertaining to the compliance of the provisions under Section 138 read with Section 142 of the N.I. Act, whereby postdishonour of cheque and receiving of the information by the holder of the cheque, a statutory notice is to be issued requiring the accused to make the payment within 15 days. He submits that there is no recital in the summoning order with regard to issuance and service of the statutory notice. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the summoning order be set aside and the matter be remitted back.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that whatever might be, once the cheque stood dishonoured, then the presumption under Section 139 of the N.I. Act is always in favour of holder of the cheque. However, he submits that crucial aspect with regard to statutory demand notice has not been adverted to. Thus according to him, the order be set aside.

¶10

Considering the submissions so made across the Bar and looking into the over all fact situation and the arguments so sought to be advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant with regard to non-recital of the date on which the statutory notice was issued and served, the order dated 09.05.2024 passed in Complaint Case no.274 of 2023, Satyavir Singh vs. Jitendra Singh is set aside, matter stands remitted back to the court below to pass a fresh order strictly in accordance with law. For facilitation, the certified copy of the order be submitted before the court below by 18.07.2025.

¶11

The application is disposed of accordingly.

¶12

Order Date :- 1.7.2025 N.S.Rathour

¶13

(Vikas Budhwar, J)

¶14

Digitally signed by :- NIPENDRA SINGH RATHOUR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jitendra Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jitendra Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shoaib and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Narendra Singh and Anothers vs State of U.P. and Another

Manoj Kumar vs Union of India Thru. Ministry Housing and Urban Affairs (Mohua ) and 2 Others

Saiyad Sajid Ali vs Presiding Officer Ind. Tribunal Lko and 3 Others

Vipul Tyagi vs State of U.P. and Another

Hemendra and Another vs State of U.P. and 3 Others