Judgment Reserved on: 11.08.2025 Judgment Delivered on: 07.10.2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

Criminal Misc . Application No. 1679 of 2019

Praveen Kumar Goel ...Applicant

Versus

Mrs. Bina Kumari Parihar ...Respondent

With

Criminal Misc. Application No. 1829 of 2019

Praveen Kumar Goel ...Applicant

Versus

Mrs. Bina Kumari Parihar ...Respondent

Criminal Misc. Application No. 1852 of 2019

Praveen Kumar Goel ....Applicant

Versus

Mrs. Bina Kumari Parihar ...Respondent

Criminal Misc. Application No. 1044 of 2017

Praveen Kumar Goel ...Applicant

Versus

Mrs. Bina Kumari Parihar ...Respondent

Criminal Misc. Application No. 1098 of 2017

Praveen Kumar Goel ...Applicant

Versus

Mrs. Bina Kumari Parihar ...Respondents Criminal Misc. Application No. 1855 of 2019 Praveen Kumar Goel ...Applicant Versus Mrs. Bina Kumari Parihar ...Respondent Presence: Mr.Bhupesh Kandpal, learned counsel for the Applicant.

Mr. Prem Kaushal, learned counsel for the Respondent Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J.

1. These applications arise out of separate complaint cases instituted by Smt. Bina Kumari Parihar against the applicant, Shri Praveen Kumar Goel, under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

The corresponding complaint case numbers are as follows:

C-482 No. 1044 of 2017 — Complaint Case No. 1995 of 2015; C-482 No. 1098 of 2017 — Complaint Case No. 3977 of 2015; C-482 No. 1679 of 2019 — Complaint Case No. 1698 of 2017 (OldNo. 262 of 2015);

C-482 No. 1829 of 2019 — Complaint Case No. 3433 of 2016; C-482 No. 1852 of 2019 — Complaint Case No. 2310 of 2015;

and C-482 No. 1855 of 2019 — Complaint Case No. 3006 of 2015.

2. In each of these proceedings, the summoning orders passed by the learned trial court at Dehradun and the consequent criminal complaints are under challenge on identical grounds. Interim protection had been granted by coordinate Benches in the respective matters vide orders dated 11.08.2017, 18.08.2017, 27.08.2019, 05.09.2019, 13.09.2019 and 13.09.2019, which have continued from time to time.

3. Praveen Kumar Goel (Applicant/petitioner) filed a Criminal Miscellaneous Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. before the Uttarakhand High Court seeking to quash the summoning order dated 06.04.2019 passed in Criminal Complaint No. 1698 of 2017 (Old No. 262 of 2015) under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The complaint was filed by Mrs. Bina Kumari Parihar (Respondent/complainant) in the Court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun. Since all these applications involves similar issues, therefore, all these applications are clubbed together and are being decided by a common judgment. Criminal Misc. Application (C482) No.1679 of 2019 shall be the leading petition.

4. According to the complaint, Mrs. Bina Kumari Parihar entered into an agreement with Praveen Kumar Goel to purchase two shops in Great India Palace Shopping Mall, Dehradun, developed by MNT Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., for approximately ₹97 lakhs. It is alleged that the accused (Praveen Kumar Goel) assured her he had paid the full amount to the developer and also promised returns on the investment. Later, when discrepancies surfaced, he allegedly issued a cheque of ₹5 lakhs which was dishonoured with the remark “stop payment.” A legal notice was served but no payment was made, leading to the filing of the complaint.

5. The Applicant moved the High Court stating that the complaint and the summoning order are not maintainable and sought stay of the proceedings. Interim relief has been granted earlier.

6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.

7. Counsel for the Applicant contends that the summoning order is unsustainable because no offence under Section 138 of the NI Act is made out. The Applicant was merely an employee or mediator in a real estate transaction involving MNT Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. and not the owner or developer. He had no legal obligation to pay the Respondent.

8. It is argued that the cheques in question were given as security, not meant for presentatio