IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL C-482 No. 104 OF 2006 Vijay Bhushan Pandey ….……Applicant. Versus Judicial Maigstrate-I, Dehradun and another. ……...Respondents. Present: None for the applicant. Mr. Ramji Srivastava, Advocate for respondent no. 2. Date of Decision : 18.8.2010 Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) List revised. Case called out twice. None appears for the applicant. Heard Mr. Ramji Srivastava, Advocate for respondent no.2. The applicant by means of present Criminal Misc. Application has challenged the order dated 15.11.2000, whereby he has been summoned on a complaint before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Brief facts of the case are that the applicant had drawn a Cheque of Rs. 28,000/- on 30.6.2000, which was dishonoured on 3.7.2000 and thereafter a notice was given to the applicant by respondent no. 2 under the provisions of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Since the said amount remained unpaid, a complaint was filed by respondent no. 2 against the applicant under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. As such, the procedure as laid down under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 prima facie seems to be in order, reflect to the findings in the trial court. The Chief Judicial Magistrate while taking cognizance in the matter has taken cognizance of all the relevant factors. There seems to be no good ground therefore for interfering with the order dated 15.11.2000. The instant 482 petition deserves to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 18.8.2010 Rathour