JUDGMENT

Rajeev Misra, J.

Heard Mr. Sagir Ahmad, the learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Syed Irfan Ali, the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State and Mr. Gaurav Kakkar, the learned counsel representing first informant/opposite party-2.

2. Perused the record.

3. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging the Summoning Order dated 22.11.2021 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khurja, Bulandshahar, in Complaint Case No. 701 of 2021 (M/s Naresh Potteries v. M/s Aarti Industries) under Section 138 N.I. Act, Police Station-Kotwali Khurja Nagar, District-Bulandshahar, as well as the entire proceedings of aforementioned complaint case, now pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khurja, Bulandshahar.

4. Record shows that applicant gave a cheque dated 10.07.2021 bearing no. 086295 valued at Rs. 1,70,46,314/- drawn on Central Bank of India, Khurja Branch, Khurja. Aforesaid cheque was presented by the complainant-opposite party 2 in his bank namely HDFC Bank, Khurja on 12.07.2021. However, the same was returned unencashed, vide return memo dated 13.07.2021 with the remark "insufficient funds". In view of above, complainant-opposite party 2 gave a legal notice dated 15.04.2021 as contemplated under section 138(b) of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as the NI Act) by registered post. The said notice was served upon applicant on 20.07.2021. Aforementioned notice was replied by the applicant raising various pleas in defence of the fact that no payment is liable to be made by the applicant in terms of the disputed cheque. As the amount payable under the disputed cheque was not paid within the period contemplated under the Act after receipt of notice, complainant-opposite party 2 filed a complaint dated 08.09.2021 in terms of section 138 of the N.I. Act through the power of attorney holder namely Neeraj Kumar. In support of the complaint, the power of attorney holder namely Neeraj Kumar filed his notary affidavit in terms of Section 200 Cr.P.C. The same was registered as Complaint Case No. 701 of 2021 (M/s Naresh Potteries v. M/s Aarti Industries) under Section 138 N.I. Act, Police Station-Kotwali Khurja Nagar, District-Bulandshahar. Applicant who is a prospective accused in aforementioned complaint case, was summoned by court below vide summoning order dated 22.11.2021 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khurja, Bulandshahar.

5. Thus feeling aggrieved by the summoning order dated 22.11.2021, referred to above as well as the entire proceedings of aforementioned complaint case, accused-applicant has now approached this Court by means of present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

6. Mr. Sagir Ahmad, the learned senior counsel for applicant in support of present application submits that the impugned summoning order passed by court below is unsustainable in law and fact. Consequently, the same is liable to be quashed by this Court. Before summoning the applicant, court below has not adverted to the material defect in the complaint. Consequently, court below has not exercised it's jurisdiction diligently. Applicant has been summoned by court below in a casual and cavalier manner by means of the summoning order dated 21.12.2021.

7. Elaborating his submission, the learned senior counsel submits that the complaint giving rise to present criminal proceedings was filed on behalf of complainant through his manager, Neeraj Kumar/power of attorney holder. However, in the complaint so filed there is no categorical averment that the power of attorney holder who has filed the complaint is having personal knowledge about the transactions in respect of which the disputed cheque is alleged to have issued by applicant. It is then contended that the power of attorney holder has not stated in the complaint that he has personal knowledge of such facts (i.e. the facts relating to the transactions in respect of which the disputed cheque was gi