JUDGMENT : Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) 1. A complaint being Criminal Complaint Case No.435 of 2015 was filed by the present applicant under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Khatima, District-Udham Singh Nagar wherein the accused has been summoned and asked to put in appearance in the case. As of now, the substance of the accusation has been stated under Section 251 CrPC and thereafter orders have been passed under Section 254 CrPC and by now trial has begun. However, it appears that date after date have been given without any substantial reason in the matter. In spite of the application of the present applicant/complainant in this regard nothing has been done by the court below. Hence, the present application under Section 482 CrPC before this Court. 2. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Indian Bank Association and others Vs. Union of India & others reported in (2014) 5 SCC 590 has held that matters relating to Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act must be expedited. The relevant paragraph 23 of the said judgment reads as under:- “23. Many of the directions given by the various High Courts, in our view, are worthy of emulation by the criminal courts all over the country dealing with cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, for which the following directions are being given: 23.1. The Metropolitan Magistrate/Judicial Magistrate (MM/JM), on the day when the complaint under Section 138 of the Act is presented, shall scrutinize the complaint and, if the complaint is accompanied by the affidavit, and the affidavit and the documents, if any, are found to be in order, take cognizance and direct issuance of summons. 23.2. The MM/JM should adopt a pragmatic and realistic approach while issuing summons. Summons must be properly addressed and sent by post as well as by e-mail address got from the complainant. The court, in appropriate cases, may take the assistance of the police or the nearby court to serve notice on the accused. For notice of appearance, a short date be fixed. If the summons is received back unserved, immediate follow-up action be taken. 23.3. The court, in appropriate cases, may take the assistance of the police or the nearby court to serve notice on the accused. For notice of appearance, a short date be fixed. If the summons is received back unserved, immediate follow-up action be taken. 23.3. The court may indicate in the summons that if the accused makes an application for compounding of offences at the first hearing of the case and, if such an application is made, the court may pass appropriate orders at the earliest. 23.4. The court should direct the accused, when he appears to furnish a bail bond, to ensure his appearance during trial and ask him to take notice under Section 251 CrPC to enable him to enter his plea of defence and fix the case for defence evidence, unless an application is made by the accused under Section 145(2) for recalling a witness for cross-examination. 23.5. The court concerned must ensure that examination-in-chief, cross-examination and re-examination of the complainant must be conducted within three months of assigning the case. The court has option of accepting affidavits of the witnesses instead of examining them in the court. The witnesses to the complaint and the accused must be available for cross-examination as and when there is direction to this effect by the court.” 3. In view thereof, the application under Section 482 CrPC stands disposed with the direction to the court below to expedite the matter as per the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Indian Bank Association and others Vs. Union of India & others.