Interim Order 3

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: 26 CC NI ACT 11338/2025
Pranav Creations Pvt Ltd Vs. Sumit Kumar Goyal
09.07.2026
Present: Sh. Siddhant Prakash, Ld. Counsel for complainant (through VC).
None for proposed accused.
Matter is at the stage of consideration.
On LDOH, complainant side was directed to clarify about the delay in
filing the present complaint. Today, Ld. Counsel for complainant submits that the
prescribed period of limitation for filing the present complaint expired on
23.06.2025 and the present complaint was filed on 25.06.2025 on account of
vacations of the court. He has resorted to S. 4 of Limitation Act to submit that his
complaint has been filed within the limitation period.
Submissions heard. Record perused.
S. 4 of Limitation Act clarifies that if the period of filing of any
suit/application/appeal expires on any day when the court is closed, such
appeal/application/suit may be filed on the day of re-opening of the court. It is
apparent that court was closed till 24.06.2025 on account of summer holidays. The
present complaint was filed on the day of re-opening of courts i.e. 25.06.2025. It is a
settled law that limitation act is applicable to the complaint u/s 138 NI Act.
In view of the same, it is apparent that there is no delay on behalf of
the complainant in filing of the present complaint.
File perused. All the statutory requirements under NI Act are complied
with. After perusal of the entire record, this court is of the considered opinion that
prima facie case punishable u/s 138 of NI Act is made out against the accused.
Cognizance of the same is taken.
Perusal of case file reveals that cheque in question was presented for
encashment and was returned dishonored vide return memo. Accused has failed to
make payment within the legally prescribed period despite the service of legal
demand notice upon him. The complaint is within the territorial jurisdiction of this
-- 1 of 2 --
court and is within limitation. Enquiry u/s 225 BNSS conducted by scrutinizing
documents.
Arguments on summoning heard. Following the law laid down in A.C.
Narayanan Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. (2024) 11 SCC 790, complaint,
evidence by way of affidavit and documents considered. In view of complaint,
documents produced and verification in the form of affidavit there are sufficient
grounds for proceeding further against the accused for offence punishable u/s 138 NI
Act.
GST details of proposed accused proprietor is already on record.
Issue summons to the accused proprietor, on filing of PF within three
months, through all modes.
Complainant is directed to supply the soft copy of complaint and
documents to the accused well in time.
In case of online service, complainant is directed to file requisite
affidavit with contact details of the accused and certificate U/s 63 BSA to show due
service through online mode. Complainant is directed to file proof of service.
Summons 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 side on the no. 9555778834, 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 16.02.2027.
(URVI GUPTA)
J.M.F.C.-01(N.I.Act)/Central,
THC/Delhi/09.07.2026
-- 2 of 2 --