Order 2

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: 38 CC NI ACT / 3714/2024
Kamini Kumari Vs. Meenakshi
01.06.2024
The undersigned is also working as Link MM.
Present:- Complainant in person with counsel.
Duly stamped return memo filed. Taken on record.
Complainant is examined and discharged as CW-1.
Arguments on summoning heard.
I have gone through the entire record including the
complaint and the documents. It is alleged that accused has
issued the cheque in question to the complainant to discharge his
liability. On its presentation the same was dishonored. Therefore,
demand notice was sent to the accused by the complainant.
Despite service/ deemed service of said notice, accused has failed
to make the payment as per provisions of Negotiable Instruments
Act.
Complaint is filed within the prescribed period of
limitation. In my considered opinion, prima facie there is
sufficient material available on record to summon the accused.
Hence, accused be summoned for offence u/s 138 of
Negotiable Instruments Act on filing of PF/RC. In the event the
house/office/premises is found to be locked/refusal to accept the
service/any other contingency the process be served through
affixation. PF be filed within seven working days. Summons be
also given dasti.
Complainant is also liberty to serve the summon
through Whatsap and E-mail. Complainant is directed to file an
affidavit with regard to electronic service of summons as per
rule.
Matter be taken up now on 08/10/2024.
-- 1 of 2 --
-2-
As per the guidelines laid down as in the case titled
as “Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H”, AIR2010(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.”
(Divya Gupta)
MM-05(NI Act), (C)/THC/DELHI
01.06.2024
-- 2 of 2 --