Full Order Text
Order 2 · 04 Oct 2025 · CNR DLCT020218822025
Order Details: COPY OF ORDER Pdf Text: 65 CC NI ACT/9189/2025 CNR NO.:-DLCT020218822025 HARSHIT SINGH VS. POOJA SHUKLA 04.10.2025 Present : Sh. Anuj Kumar, Ld. Proxy Counsel for the complainant. In complaince of the previous order, e-filing history filed. Taken on record. Ld. Proxy Counsel for complainant submits that as per the recent judgement of Hon’ble Supreme court tilted as Sanjabij Tari v. Kishore S. Borcar and Anr Crl. No.1755/2010, pronounced on 25.09.2025 the compliance under proviso to Section 223 BNSS has been dispensed with in the cases pertaining to Negotiable Instruments Act. In view of the aforementioned submission, previous compliance of order dated 10.07.2025 stands dispensed. Submissions heard. Record perused. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the decision reported as A.C. Narayanan vs. State of Maharashtra (2014) 11 SCC 790 has held as under, “29. From a conjoint reading of Sections 138, 142 and 145 of the N.I. 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…. …33.4 In the light of Section 145 of the NI Act, 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 and the Magistrate is neither mandatorily obliged to call upon the complainant to remain present before the Court, nor to examine the complainant or his witness upon oath for taking the decision whether or not to issue process on the complaint under Section 138 of the NI Act.” Similar directions have been issued in Indian Bank Association & Ors. vs. Union of India (2014) 5 SCC 590 and Rajesh Agarwal vs. State (2010) 171 DLT 51. -- 1 of 1 --