Narendra Verma @ Narendra Singh Verma vs State of U.P… — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2025)

Narendra Verma @ Narendra Singh Verma vs State of U.P… — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 02.08.2025 of the Additional Civil Judge (J.D.), Room No. 5, Kanpur Nagar and the entire proceedings of Complaint No. 3051 of 2018 under Section 138 of the N.I. Act pending before that court should be quashed, the applicant contending that the dishonoured cheque was lost and a police report was filed. +1 more

Court's answer

The question whether the cheque was lost and complaint made is a question of fact required to be adjudicated in the trial court proceedings, with both parties having liberty to lead evidence in that respect.

Ratio / Principle

At the summary stage, proceedings cannot be quashed on the basis of the defence raised.

Key takeaways

The pleas raised by the applicant are in the nature of the defence of the applicant-accused, and the defence version of events would require a mini-trial, with the defence evidence and arguments to be presented and proved during the trial.ratio¶11
While exercising inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 BNSS or revisional jurisdiction under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in a case where a complaint is sought to be quashed, it is not proper for the Court to consider the defence of the accused or embark upon an enquiry into the merits of the accusations; the facts raised must be proved by the applicant-accused before the trial court before being considered.ratio¶14

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Quashing application dismissed – Claim that the dishonoured cheque was 'lost' and a police report filed is a question of fact to be adjudicated at the trial, not at the summary stage; while exercising inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 BNSS (or revisional jurisdiction under Section 397 CrPC) in a complaint-quashing matter, it is not proper to consider the defence of the accused or enquire into the merits of the accusations; the defence version would require a mini-trial and defence evidence/arguments must be presented and proved during trial. Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 45148 of 2025 (Narendra Verma @ Narendra Singh Verma v. State of U.P. and Another) sought quashing of the order dated 02.08.2025 of the Additional Civil Judge (J.D.), Room No. 5, Kanpur Nagar and the entire proceedings of Complaint No. 3051 of 2018 (Alok Kumar Kushwaha v. Narendra Verma) under Section 138 of the N.I. Act; dismissed by Vikram D. Chauhan, J., on November 17, 2025.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 45148 of 2025

Narendra Verma @ Narendra Singh Verma

	Versus .....Applicant(s)
State of U.P. and Another	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Mukesh Kumar, Tarun Pratap Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

Court No. - 76

HON'BLE VIKRAM D. CHAUHAN, J.

Heard learned counsel for applicants and learned AGA for the State.

The present application has been filed by applicants for quashing the order dated 02.08.2025 passed by learned Additional Civil Judge (J.D.), Room No. 5, Kanpur Nagar as well as entire proceeding of Complaint No.3051 of 2018 (Alok Kumar Kushwaha Vs. Narendra Verma) under Section 138 of N.I. Act, Police Station Kalyanpur, District Kanpur Nagar, pending in the court of Additional Civil Judge (J.D.), Room No. 5, Kanpur Nagar.

It is submitted by learned counsel for applicant that cheque in question was dishonoured, however, the aforesaid cheque was lost and in respect of that a police report was also filed. Learned counsel for applicant has relied upon a judgment of this Court in Bobby Anand @ Yogesh Anand Vs. State of U.P. and another, 2023 Legal Eagle (AlD) 391.

It is to be seen that in the present matter, the question that the cheque has lost and complaint has been made, is a question of fact, which is required to be adjudicated at the trial court proceedings. Both the parties would have liberty to lead evidence in this respect. At this summary stage, proceedings cannot be quashed on the basis of defence raised.

The plea raised by the applicant in the present application are in the nature of defence of applicant-accused. The defence version of events would require a mini-trial. The defense evidence and arguments are meant

NA528 No. 45148 of 2025

2

to be presented and proved during the trial. It is now fairly settled that while exercising inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 BNSS or revisional jurisdiction under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in a case where complaint is sought to be quashed, it is not proper for the this Court to consider the defence of the accused or embark upon an enquiry in respect of merits of the accusations. The nature of plea raised by the Applicant are essentially questions of fact and required appreciation of facts, which this court does not consider necessary to be considered at this stage as these facts are required to be proved by the applicant-accused before the trial court prior to the same being considered.

In view of aforesaid, the application under Section 528 BNSS is dismissed.

(Vikram D. Chauhan,J.)

November 17, 2025

D. Tamang

Digitally signed by :- DHIRENDRA TAMANG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad