Hon’ble Vinod Prasad, J.—Geeta has approached this Court through the instant Criminal Misc. Application No. 89 of 2006, under Section 482, Cr. P.C., with the prayer to quash the proceedings of Complaint Case No. 266/04, under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, read with Section 420, IPC, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saharanpur with the nomenclature Smt. Manju v. Geeta. The subsequent prayer is for stay of further proceedings of the aforesaid complaint case till the disposal of present application in this Court.

2. The factual matrix of the case has got its genesis in the complaint filed by Smt. Manju w/o late Prithvi Singh on 13.1.2004 in the Court of CJM, Saharanpur being complaint case No. 266/04 with the allegations that husband of the complainant late Prithvi Singh was the employee in Railways and the complainant with her small children was living alongwith her parents. Accompanied by her father and sisters the complainant used to visit the house of the accused Smt. Manju and resultantly was closely intimated with her. Accused applicant offered the complainant that her father is going to purchase the land for carving out plots and for the said purpose they require Rs. 60,000/-. They assured the complainant Smt. Manju that her money will be repaid from the sale proceeds of the plots or in the alternative she will get a plot of 100 square yards. Reposing trust in them and believing the offer to be genuine, the complainant gave Rs. 60,000/- to the applicant accused Smt. Geeta on 25.7.2003 in the presence of her sister Babita, Smt. Satto w/o Yash Pal, Manoj and Deepak. In lieu the applicant accused Geeta issued two cheques of Rs. 30,000/- each to the complainant being cheque No. 104999 and 105000, both of Punjab and Sindh Bank drawn from account No. 12297 dated 5.6.2003. With the assurances that cheques will be honoured after few months. The complainant Smt. Manjoo presented the aforesaid cheques in her Panjab National Bank for encashment on 5.12.2003 but the same were dishounored by Punjab and Sindh Bank with the note that account has been closed and it returned the aforesaid cheques to the complainant with the memos dated 8.12.2003 and 18.12.2003. The complainant gave registered notice to the accused applicant Smt. Geeta on her correct address asking her to repay the cheque amount but the notice was also returned on 3.1.2004 with the endorsement that addressee could not be found.

3. As the complainant was cheated to a tune of Rs. 60,000/-, therefore, she layed the complaint in the Court of CJM, Saharanpur as mentioned above, appending therewith the photocopy of both the cheques, registered notice sent by her, carbon copy of the notice and the original registry receipt. Learned Magistrate took the cognizance of the offence and examined the complainant under Section 200, Cr. P.C. She however did not examine any witness under Section 202, Cr. P.C. Learned Magistrate finding the prima-facie case, summoned the present accused applicant Geeta for offences under Section 138 of N.I. Act as well as under Section 420, IPC, vide his order dated 15.3.2004 fixing 15.4.2004 for appearance of the accused. Geeta aggrieved by her summoning order preferred criminal revision No. 194 of 2004, Geeta v. State and another, before the Sessions Judge, Saharanpur on 15.6.2004, which was transferred to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge Court No. 6, Saharanpur for disposal. Her criminal revision was dismissed by the lower revisional Court, vide its order dated 7.10.2005 Annexure 4 to the affidavit, hence the present Criminal Misc. Application by the accused with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings.

4. I have heard Sri Mayank Agrawal, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Pankaj Tyagi and Smt. Archna Tyagi on behalf of respondent No. 2, as well as learned AGA.

5. Sri Mayank Agrawal, learned counsel for the applicant raised two submissions. Firstly, he contended that the cheques dated 5.6.2003 were presente