Salman Qadir vs State Of U.P. And Another

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant; learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. Present application has been filed to quash the summoning order dated 02.04.2021 as well as entire proceeding in Complaint Case No.1408 of 2020 (Mohd. Gufran Vs. Salman Qadir) under Sections 138 of N.I. Act, P.S. Civil Line, District Aligarh, pending in the Court of Special Court (J.M.) Aligarh.

3. It is alleged in the complaint that complainant is one of the Director along with applicant in a company, namely, Afan Food Processing Pvt. Ltd. and he invested Rs.67 lakh in the said company but after some dispute arisen between the parties, the applicant agreed to repay of Rs.52 lakh to the complainant and the applicant gave post dated cheque to the complainant and when the same was presented before the bank, the same was dishonoured. Thereafter another cheque bearing no. 000007 dated 01.01.2020 of Rs.48 lakh was given by the applicant to opposite party no. 2 and when it was presented before the Bank, the same was also dishonoured. Hence, the present complaint.

4. Counsel for the applicant submits that allegation alleged in the complaint is false, baseless and has been lodged with malicious intention only to harass the applicant. the order impugned has been passed in mechanical manner without considering the material evidence. The summoning order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate is without application of judicial mind and is liable to be set aside.

5. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for quashing the proceedings of the aforesaid case and has submitted that the order impugned do not suffer from any illegality or infirmity.

6. From perusal of the impugned order, it is apparent that the learned Magistrate has passed the said order after perusing the material evidence on record. The order impugned is just and proper and impugned order does not suffer from any illegality and infirmity. The cognizance and summoning by the court concerned is based upon material evidence available on record. The submission raised by counsel for the applicant cannot be examined at this stage. Moreover, on perusal of order sheet attached with the application, the orders dated 13.02.2025, 18.03.2025 and 17.04.2025 reveals that applicants are not appearing before the trial court and exemption application has been allowed with cost and case is posted for final hearing. Since the proceedings before the trial court is on the verge of conclusion, as such, no interference is warranted at this stage.

7. The present application is, accordingly, dismissed.

(Deepak Verma,J.)

May 7, 2026

Meenu Singh