Allahabad High Court
RAEES KHANversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- DEEPAK VERMA
Holding
The complaint was rightly dismissed for lack of evidence of alteration, and the lower courts' orders were upheld.
Summary
The petitioner, Raees Khan, filed a petition under Article 227 challenging the dismissal of his complaint alleging that the respondent altered the amount on two cheques from Rs.3,000 to Rs.300,000, causing dishonour. The petitioner failed to produce any evidence of such alteration. The Chief Judicial Magistrate dismissed the complaint under Section 203 of the Criminal Procedure Code for lack of evidence, a decision affirmed by the Additional Sessions Judge on revision. The High Court examined the arguments and found no illegality in the lower courts' orders, noting the absence of proof of the alleged fraud. Consequently, the petition was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether the complaint can be dismissed under Section 203 Cr.P.C. for lack of evidence of alteration of cheque amount.
- Whether the revisional court erred in upholding the dismissal of the complaint.
- Whether the High Court has jurisdiction under Article 227 to entertain the petition.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 203
Subjects
- cheque fraud
- alteration of cheque
- Section 203 CrPC
- revision
- Article 227
- criminal complaint
- evidence
- dismissal
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 16342 of 2025
Raees Khan
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Aktar Ahmed Siddiqui
Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 74
HON'BLE DEEPAK VERMA, J.
1. Heard counsel for the petitioner; learned A.G.A. and perused
the record.
2. The present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of
India has been filed challenging the order dated 14.10.2025
passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Shahjahanpur in
Revision No. 88 of 2024 (Raees Khan Vs. State of U.p. and
another) and the order dated 05.03.2024 passed by the learned
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shahjahanpur, in Complaint Case No.
2228 of 2023 (Raees Khan Vs. Arish Khan and another).
3. It is alleged in the complaint that complainant/petitioner issued
two cheques in favour of opposite party no. 2/respondent for
amount Rs.3000/- each but the opposite party no.2
manufactured/interpolated the cheques for amount of Rs.300000/-
in place of Rs.3000/- and the same got dishonoured. Counsel for
the petitioner submits that respondent/opposite party no.2
misused and interpolated the figure shown in the cheque issued
by the petitioner. As such, prima facie criminal offence is made
out against the opposite party no.2/respondent.
4. Considered the argument raised by counsel for the petitioner
and perused the record. It is admitted case of the petitioner that
the cheque was issued by him in favour of opposite party no. 2
for amount of Rs.3000/- but the figure shown in the cheque has
A227 No. 16342 of 2025
2
been changed from Rs.3000/- to Rs.3,00000/-. But the petitioner
has not produced any evidence in regard to change in figure
amount written on cheque. The allegation against the opposite
party no.2 is that he changed the figure Rs.3000/- to Rs.3,00000/-
. The correction of figure in cheques is not supported by any
evidence. The learned Magistrate has rightly dismissed the
complaint under Section 203 Cr.P.C. observing that petitioner has
not produced any evidence before the trial court in regard to
alteration and correction in the figure amount. The dismissal of
the complaint under section 203 Cr.P.C. is just and proper. The
learned Magistrate has found no offence against the opposite
party no. 2. The Revisional Court has also not found any criminal
offence on face value and rightly dismissed the revision of the
petitioner. There is no illegality in the orders impugned.
5. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Deepak Verma,J.)
September 8, 2026
Meenu Singh
Digitally signed by :-
MEENU SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…