Ravindra Nath Dubey v. Surya Prakash Upadhyay), under Section

police station. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that trial court has not recorded any finding in this respect in the impugned order dated 7.7.2025.

4. It is to be seen that in the present case the dispute arises out of the complaint case where under Section 138 of the N.I. Act cheque in question which has dishonoured is of Rs. 5,40,000/-. The submission raised by learned counsel for the applicant to the veracity of the compromise dated 22.12.2022 is a question of fact which is required to be dealt with at the stage of trial. Whether the document is admissible or not is to be gone into by the trial court at the stage of trial. At this stage, under Section 528 BNSS this Court is not required to hold a mini trial. It is further to be noted that another plea has been raised by the applicant that the cheque in question was lost in respect of which complaint was made to the bank as well as to the police station. The aforesaid issue is also question of fact which is required to be decided by the trial court after the applicant leads evidence to rebut the compromise under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

5. 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 to be presented and proved 3 NA528 No. 41205 of 2025 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 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.

6. Section 118 of the Negotiable Instruments Act provides that until the contrary is proved, the presumptions shall be made (a) of consideration:-that every negotiable instrument was made or drawn for consideration, and that every such instrument, when it has been accepted, indorsed, negotiated or transferred, was accepted, indorsed, negotiated or transferred for consideration; (b) as to date:-that every negotiable instrument bearing a date was made or drawn on such date. Further, under section 139 of the said Act, it is provided that it shall be presumed, unless the contrary is proved, that the holder of a cheque received the cheque of the nature referred to in section 138 for the discharge, in whole or in part, of any debt or other liability.

7. On a query being made to learned counsel for the applicant as to how this Court under Section 528 BNSS can examine the question of fact, learned counsel for the applicant fairly submits that question of fact are required to be dealt with by the trial court. It is further to be seen that the issues being raised by the applicant can always be raised before the trial court in his defence. At this stage, this Court does not deem it proper to interfere in the impugned order, more particularly, when the impugned order has recorded a finding that the issues raised are required to be dealt with after lodging of evidence by the parties. 4 NA528 No. 41205 of 2025

8. The present application lacks merit and is dismissed accordingly. October 28, 2025 VMA (Vikram D. Chauhan,J.)

police station. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that trial court has not recorded any finding in this respect in the impugned order dated 7.7.2025.

4. It is to be seen that in the present case the dispute arises out of the complaint case where under Section 138 of the N.I. Act cheque in question which has dishonoured is of Rs. 5,40,000/-. The submission raised by learned counsel for the applicant to the veracity of the compromise dated 22.12.2022 is a question of fact which is required to be dealt with at the stage of trial. Whether the document is admissible or not is to be gone into by the trial court at the stage of trial. At this stage, under Section 528 BNSS this Court is not required to hold a mini trial. It is further to be noted that another plea has been raised by the applicant that the cheque in question was lost in respect of which complaint was made to the bank as well as to the police station. The aforesaid issue is also question of fact which is required to be decided by the trial court after the applicant leads evidence to rebut the compromise under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

5. 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 to be presented and proved 3 NA528 No. 41205 of 2025 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 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.

6. Section 118 of the Negotiable Instruments Act provides that until the contrary is proved, the presumptions shall be made (a) of consideration:-that every negotiable instrument was made or drawn for consideration, and that every such instrument, when it has been accepted, indorsed, negotiated or transferred, was accepted, indorsed, negotiated or transferred for consideration; (b) as to date:-that every negotiable instrument bearing a date was made or drawn on such date. Further, under section 139 of the said Act, it is provided that it shall be presumed, unless the contrary is proved, that the holder of a cheque received the cheque of the nature referred to in section 138 for the discharge, in whole or in part, of any debt or other liability.

7. On a query being made to learned counsel for the applicant as to how this Court under Section 528 BNSS can examine the question of fact, learned counsel for the applicant fairly submits that question of fact are required to be dealt with by the trial court. It is further to be seen that the issues being raised by the applicant can always be raised before the trial court in his defence. At this stage, this Court does not deem it proper to interfere in the impugned order, more particularly, when the impugned order has recorded a finding that the issues raised are required to be dealt with after lodging of evidence by the parties. 4 NA528 No. 41205 of 2025

8. The present application lacks merit and is dismissed accordingly. October 28, 2025 VMA (Vikram D. Chauhan,J.)