JUDGMENT Hon’ble Servesh Kumar Gupta, J. This judgment will adjudicate the issue between the parties regarding both the petitions titled above. 2. The agreement dated 15.11.2011 was entered into between the Sugar Mill based at Laksar, District Haridwar and Ambuj Chaudhary, wherein the latter was granted contract for the removal and handling of ‘Pressed Mud’ at the rate of Rs.30/- per quintal on the basis of ‘as is where is’. 3. Petitioner Ambuj Chaudhary was asked to deposit the security worth Rs.10.00 lakh at the time of accepting the order, which was refundable after the crushing season/ session 2011-2012. A further sum of Rs.10.00 lakh was to be deposited before the start of Factory and thereafter advance payment for every week. 4. The dispute arose when, as the consideration of the ‘Pressed Mud’, three Cheques were issued by the petitioner Mr. Chaudhary to make payments to the Sugar Mill. Every Cheque was worth Rs.5.00 lakh, which later on, were dishonoured by the Bank. Hence, the notices were exchanged between the parties, as contemplated under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner-Ambuj Chaudhary has argued that these cheques were not in lieu of the payments due to his client for purchase of the ‘Pressed Mud’ but in fact, those were blank dated and were issued in compliance of Condition No.14 of the said Agreement dated 15.11.2011. The said condition talks about the security money. 6. The argument, put forth by learned counsel for the petitioner is wholly unsubstantial and is thus, rejected. The reason is that One Cheque bears the date 6.3.2012 whereas another Cheque bears the date 2.4.2012. The crushing season, as it appears, started just after the agreement entered into between the parties on 15.11.2011 and was in existence almost up to the dates of issuing these Cheques by the petitioner-Ambuj Chaudhary favouring the Sugar Mill. Had these Cheques were drawn and issued in compliance of Condition No.14 of the said Agreement, as stated hereinabove, then there was no question for the Sugar Factory to accept those Cheques un-dated and to keep them reserved without encashing them. 7. Moreover, whether those Cheques were blank dated or were bearing the date is a question of fact which cannot be looked into by this Court while deciding the petition moved under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 7. Moreover, whether those Cheques were blank dated or were bearing the date is a question of fact which cannot be looked into by this Court while deciding the petition moved under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Rather, it is to be determined by the Trial Court. 8. Thus, in view of what has been stated hereinabove, there is no force in these petitions which are liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, both the petitions are dismissed. Interim orders dated 10.10.2012 and 19.10.2012 passed in C482 Petitions No.1106/2012 and 1160/2012 respectively, are hereby vacated. (Stay Vacation Applications No.1587/2012 and 1588/2012 also stand disposed of) 9. Inform the Court below by sending a copy of this judgment and order, enabling it to proceed ahead with the trial forthwith.