[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Uttarakhand High Court
C528/669/2026 on 15 April, 2026
2026:UHC:2647
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
SL.
Date or directions COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No.
and Registrar's
order with
Signatures
C528 No.669 of 2026
Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.
Mr. Mukesh Kumar Kaparuwan,
Advocate for the applicant.
2. The present application under
Section 528 seeks quashing of the
impugned summoning order dated
02.01.2026 as well as the entire
proceedings of Criminal Misc. Case No.
01 of 2026, pending before the Court of
learned Judicial Magistrate, Narendra
Nagar, District Tehri Garhwal.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant
submits that the complaint has been
instituted under Section 138 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act and that the
learned Magistrate has mechanically
taken cognizance without due application
of mind. It is contended that the cheque
in question was issued merely as a
security and not towards discharge of
any legally enforceable debt or liability.
It is further argued that the dispute is
purely civil in nature arising out of a
friendly loan, and there was no criminal
intent or mens rea on the part of the
applicant. It is also submitted that the
cheque was dishonoured due to financial
constraints and not with any intention to
cheat, and that the applicant has
subsequently repaid the entire amount,
which reflects his bona fide intention.
4. Per contra, upon perusal of the
record, it transpires that the learned
Magistrate, after considering the
contents of the complaint, the affidavit,
2026:UHC:2647
and the documents placed on record, has
found sufficient prima facie material to
proceed against the applicant and has
accordingly issued the summoning order.
5. It is well settled that the Court,
while exercising its inherent jurisdiction,
is not required to conduct a meticulous
examination of the evidence or
adjudicate upon disputed questions of
fact. The defence sought to be raised by
the applicant, including the plea that the
cheque was issued as security, the
nature of the transaction being civil, or
subsequent repayment of the amount,
are all matters which require evidence
and can be appropriately examined
during trial. Moreover, the mere
assertion that the cheque was issued as
security does not, by itself, absolve the
applicant of liability under Section 138 of
the Negotiable Instruments Act,
particularly and such factual aspects
cannot be adjudicated in proceedings of
this nature.
6. In view of the aforesaid, this Court
finds no ground to exercise its inherent
jurisdiction for quashing of the impugned
summoning order or the proceedings
arising therefrom. The criminal misc.
application, being devoid of merit, is
accordingly dismissed.
(Alok Mahra, J.)
15.04.2026
Arpan
ARPAN Digitally signed by ARPAN JAISWAL
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT
OF UTTARAKHAND,
2.5.4.20=eabb68a3895e41937c266c23964c0485365445e3a20dd
JAISWAL
db7393398f9fe45ba3e, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND,
serialNumber=060FC17022BEAE3DE215D68D9D454C5109CB987
446351E4DF04AADAA2C2CEA66, cn=ARPAN JAISWAL
Date: 2026.04.15 17:25:52 +05'30'
