Order 5

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: 58 CC NI ACT 7991/2023 DEEPAK JAIN Vs. MANISHA JHAMB
59 CC NI ACT 7992/2023 DEEPAK JAIN Vs. BHARAT KUMAR JHAMB
60 CC NI ACT 7993/2023 DEEPAK JAIN Vs. BHARAT KUMAR JHAMB
61 CC NI ACT 7994/2023 DEEPAK JAIN Vs. BHARAT KUMAR JHAMB
62 CC NI ACT 7995/2023 DEEPAK JAIN Vs. BHARAT KUMAR JHAMB
63 CC NI ACT 7996/2023 DEEPAK JAIN Vs. BHARAT KUMAR JHAMB
64 CC NI ACT 7997/2023 DEEPAK JAIN Vs. BHARAT KUMAR JHAMB
65 CC NI ACT 7998/2023 DEEPAK JAIN Vs. BHARAT KUMAR JHAMB
66 CC NI ACT 7999/2023 DEEPAK JAIN Vs. BHARAT KUMAR JHAMB
04.06.2025
Present: Sh. Jayesh, Proxy Counsel for the complainant through VC.
Heard. Entire record including the complaint and the annexed documents perused thoroughly. It is alleged that accused
has issued the cheque(s) in question to the complainant in discharge of liability. On presentation, the same got dishonoured.
Thereafter, demand notice was sent to the accused(s) by the complainant. Despite service/ deemed service of said notice, accused
has failed to make the payment within 15 days as per provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
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.
On consideration of the complaint, annexed documents and the verification affidavit of the complainant, this Court is of
the opinion that
prima facie there are sufficient grounds for proceeding against the accused mentioned below for the commission
of offence under Section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. There is no requirement for examination of the complainant or
witnesses for purpose of issuance of process in view of the above-mentioned directions of the Hon’ble Apex Court and Hon’ble
Delhi High Court. In terms of inquiry conducted under Section 202 CrPC, all the statutory requirements have been complied
with. The complaint is filed within the period of limitation as prescribed under Section 142(1)(b) of the Negotiable Instruments
Act.
Let accused be summoned on filing of PF, RC/ Speed Post/ approved Courier service/E-mail within two weeks, for
NDOH.
Complainant is directed to place the tracking report of summons sent through speed post on record on the next date. 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 in terms of Section 65, CrPC.
As per the guidelines laid down as in the case titled as
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.”
Put up for appearance of accused on 17.09.2025.
(Arvind Tomar)
JMFC (NI)07 (Central)
04.06.2025
-- 1 of 1 --