Order 9

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: 16 CC NI ACT 6766/2024
Digamber Singh Vs. Jai Anand
31.07.2026
Present: Complainant in person.
Sh. R. S. Sharma, Ld. Counsel for complainant.
None for accused.
Previous cost of Rs. 500/- imposed on the accused has not been paid.
Due to non compliance of previous order, cost now stands enhanced to Rs. 1,500/-
which shall now to be paid to NGO on the UPI id: earthlingstrust99.rzp@icici.
Receipt of same be filed by NDOH.
PAYMENT OF COST IS PRE REQUISITE.
Accordingly, let bailable warrants in the sum of Rs. 10,000/-, be issued
against the accused, with one surety of like amount, through the SHO concerned, on
filing of PF within two months, returnable on NDOH
Complainant is directed to supply the soft copy of complaint and
documents to the accused well in time.
Warrants should carry an endorsement that accused is at liberty to
settle the matter and pay the amount to the complainant by reaching out the
complainant on the no. 9211491544, in view of the judgment passed by Hon’ble
Supreme Court of India, in case titled as
Sanjabij Tari Vs. Kishore S. Borcar & Anr.,
2025 (SC)
.
Put up for appearance of accused/ framing of notice/ furnishing of
surety/ further proceedings on 31.03.2027.
AT 02:00 P.M.
Present: None for complainant.
Accused in person.
Since accused has appeared, BWs NEED NOT BE ISSUED
AGAINST THE ACCUSED.
It is submitted by accused side that they have not received the copy of
complaint and annexures. Complainant is directed to supply the same to accused
side before the next date of hearing on the no. 9250858036.
At this stage, court has assisted the accused in framing of notice.
Heard on notice. On a perusal of the complaint and supporting
documents, this court is of the opinion that there are sufficient grounds to frame
notice against the accused and proceed to trial. The factum of issuance & dishonour
-- 1 of 2 --
of cheque in question, the service of legal demand notice, failure of payment despite
demand, liability and cumulative effect thereof culminating into an offence U/s 138
NI Act have been explained to the accused in vernacular. The attention of the
accused has been drawn to the evidence appearing against him and to each
document relied upon by the complainant.
The plea of defence of accused recorded separately.
At this stage, oral prayer for cross examination of complainant witness
is made by the accused. Keeping in mind the legislative intent as incorporated in
Section 145(2) NI Act and the defence disclosed by the accused in his plea of
defence, the court is of the view that accused is having sufficient ground to cross
examine the complainant. Accordingly, oral prayer for cross examination of
complainant witness of the accused is hereby allowed.
At this stage, Admission/denial of documents by the accused under
Section 330 BNSS is recorded separately. On the basis of the same, the two
witnesses cited at serial no. 2 and 3 in list of witnesses by complainant for same
stands dropped from said list.
This court further does not deem it appropriate/ desirable to try the
case summarily since sentence for imprisonment exceeding one year may have to be
passed, if the trial results in conviction, therefore, this case would be tried as
summons trial case.
Offence being bailable, accused is admitted to bail subject to
furnishing of personal bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety of like
amount. At this stage, the accused seeks some time to furnish surety bonds.
Put up for settlement if any/ CE/ furnishing of surety bonds of Rs.
10,000/- on date fixed on 31.03.2027.
(URVI GUPTA)
J.M.F.C.-01(N.I.Act)/Central,
THC/Delhi/31.07.2026
-- 2 of 2 --