Order 3

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: 59 CC NI ACT / 4133/2025
AKARA CAPITAL ADVISORS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. RAJEEV THAKUR
13.08.2025
Proceedings conducted through video conferencing via Cisco Webex App.
Matter taken up through Video Conferencing as per office order of Hon'ble Delhi High
Court as per order no. 4/7/RG/DHC/2020 dated 27.08.2020.
Present: Sh. Sunil Kumar, Ld. Proxy Counsel for complainant (through VC).
None for proposed accused.
Matter is at the stage of consideration.
On the LDOH, last and final opportunity was granted to the proposed accused to
appear and argue on the point of cognizance. Despite repeated calls none has entered appearance
on behalf of the proposed accused. Accordingly, opportunity stands closed.
I now proceed to consider the matter on its own merits.
Entire record including the complaint and the annexed documents perused
thoroughly.
It is alleged that accused has initiated the electronic funds transfer mandate in
question to the complainant in discharge of liability. However, the same was not executed.
Thereafter, demand notice was sent to the accused by the complainant. Despite service/ deemed
service of said notice, accused has failed to make the payment within 15 days as per provisions
of Payment and Settlement Systems Act, 2007. The complaint is filed within the period of
limitation.
In the case of A. C. Narayanan Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. (2014) 11 SCC
790, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as under:-
“29. From a conjoint reading of Sections 138, 142 and 145 of the NI Act as well as Section 200 of the Code, it is clear that it is open to
the Magistrate to issue process on the basis of the contents of the complaint, documents in support thereof and the affidavit submitted by the
complainant in support of the complaint. Once the complainant files an affidavit in support of the complaint before issuance of the process under Section
200 of the Code, it is thereafter open to the Magistrate, if he thinks fit, to call upon the complainant to remain present and to examine him as to the facts
contained in the affidavit submitted by the complainant in support of his complaint. However, it is a matter of discretion and the Magistrate is not bound
to call upon the complainant to remain present before the court and to examine him upon oath for taking decision whether or not to issue process on
the complaint under Section 138 of the NI Act. For the purpose of issuing process under Section 200 of the Code, it is open to the Magistrate to rely
upon the verification in the form of affidavit filed by the complainant in support of the complaint under Section 138 of the NI Act. It is only if and where
the Magistrate, after considering the complaint under Section 138 of the NI Act, documents produced in support thereof and the verification in the form of
affidavit of the complainant, is of the view that examination of the complainant or his witness(s) is required, the Magistrate may call upon the complainant
to remain present before the court and examine the complainant and/or his witness upon oath for taking a decision whether or not to issue process on the
complaint under Section 138 of the NI Act.”
Complaint, affidavit of evidence and documents considered in light of above
cited judgment. In opinion of this Court, there is no need to examine the complainant's
-- 1 of 2 --
evidence for purpose of issuance of process. On consideration of the complaint, annexed
documents and verification affidavit of the complainant, this Court is of the opinion that prima
facie there are sufficient grounds for taking cognizance of offence under Section 25, Payment
and Settlement Systems Act, 2007.
Arguments on the point of summoning heard.
Upon consideration of the record, this Court is of the prima facie view that there
are sufficient grounds for summoning of the accused person.
Accordingly, let accused be summoned on filing of PF, RC/ Speed Post/
approved Courier service/ E-mail within 30 days for 09/03/2026. Process server is directed to
serve the summons through all modes.
Complainant is directed to place the tracking report of summons sent through
speed post on record on the next date. As per the guidelines laid down in Damodar S. Prabhu
Vs. Sayed Babalal H, AIR 2010 (SC) 1907, Ahlmad is directed to make a mention on the
summons issued against the accused (by adding separate sheet, if required) that “accused can
make an application for compounding of the offence at the first and second hearing of the case
and if such an application is made, compounding may be allowed by the Court without
imposing any costs on the accused.”
The order be uploaded as per rules.
(Mayank Aggarwal)
JMFC (NI Act) Digital Court-02,
Central, THC, Delhi
13.08.2025
-- 2 of 2 --