Suneet Kumar, J. - (1.) This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the summoning order dated 25.07.2014 passed by A.C.J.M., Court No. 10, in Complaint Case No. 1089 of 2013 (Pradeep v. Kishor Kumar) , under Section 138 Negotiable Instrument Act, P.S. Fatehpur Sikri, District Agra, as well as, order dated 27.08.2015 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 17, Agra in Criminal Revision No. 523 of 2014 (Kishor Kumar v. State of U.P. and others) .
(2.) As per the complaint allegation, it was asserted that the applicant is a contractor in a private firm manufacturing shoes. The applicant approached the complainant demanding Rs. 20,000/- towards loan to be paid for the labour charges. The complainant paid Rs. 16500/- in cash. The sum was returned by the applicant by issuing a cheque of equal sum which was returned by the bank on 28.05.2013 due to insufficient fund. Notice was sent on 04.06.2013 through a counsel, thereafter the complaint was filed on 10.06.2013.
(3.) Learned Magistrate recorded the statement of the opposite party no. 2 under Section 200 Cr.P.C. On 16.07.2013, thereafter, summoned the applicant on 25.07.2014. The summoning order was assailed in revision being Criminal Revision No. 523 of 2014 which was rejected on 27.08.2013. The applicant is assailing the revisional order arising from the summoning. The sole point pressed by learned counsel for the applicant is that the complaint was instituted within six days from the date of issuance of the notice, hence being premature as 15 days mandatory notice had not lapsed as required under proviso to sub-clause (c) of Section 138 of the Act, therefore the complaint being premature is liable to be rejected.;