Interim Order 5

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: 53. CC NI ACT/8529/2024 DLCT020278222024
Raj Kumar Chaurasia Vs. Manish Jain
05.04.2025
Present : Complainant in person with ld. counsel Sh. Anuj Gupta.
Court notice issued to proposed accused was already received back as served.
However, none has entered appearance on behalf of the proposed accused. Hence, I deem it
apposite to hear on the point of summoning in the absence of the proposed accused.
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.
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, I hereby take cognizance of the
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 NI Act.
Let accused be summoned on filing of PF, RC/ Speed Post/ approved Courier
service/E-mail within 30 days for 07.08.2025.
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.”
(Amit Rana)
JMFC, NI Act-06, Central District, THC/05.04.2025
-- 1 of 1 --