Order 2

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: 70 CC NI ACT / 13704/2025
TOSHI ENTERPRISES Vs. UNIQUE AUTO SOLUTIONS AND ANR
13.02.2026
Case received by way of transfer.
Present: Sh.Dhruv Sharma, Ld. Counsel for the Complainant. (through VC)
Sh. Balram Singh, Ld. Proxy Counsel for the Complainant.
Physical file furnished.
Ahlmad is directed to check the same and furnish report on NDOH.
Perusal of complaint shows that the present matter has been filed after 01.07.2024 and the
same falls under Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Adhiniyam, 2023 (BNSS). As per Proviso 1 to Section 223 of BNSS,
it is mandatory to hear the proposed accused before taking cognizance. However, in light of the judgment of the
Hon’ble Supreme court in ‘
Sanjabij Tari Vs. Kishore S Borcar’, 2025 INSC 1158, the requirement of hearing the
accused on the point of cognizance is dispensed with.
Accordingly, arguments on cognizance and summoning heard on behalf of complainant.
I have gone through the entire record including the complaint and the documents. It is alleged
that accused has issued the cheque in question to the complainant to discharge his liability. On its presentation the
same was dishonored. Therefore, demand notice was sent to the accused by the complainant. Despite
service/deemed service of said notice, accused has failed to make the payment as per provisions of Negotiable
Instruments Act.
The counsel for the complainant submits that dictum of "A. C. Narayanan Vs. State of
Maharashtra & Anr." (2014) 11 SCC 790 is also applicable to complaints u/s 138 NI Act.
In the aforesaid judgment, Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has held that "...it is a matter of
discretion and the Magistrate is not bound to call upon the complainant to remain present before the court and to
examine him upon oath for taking decision whether or not to issue process on the complaint under Section 138 of
the NI Act. For the purpose of issuing process under Section 200 of the Code, 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..."
Complaint, affidavit of evidence and documents considered in light of above cited judgment.
In opinion of this Court, there is no need to examine the complainant/witnesses for purpose of issuance of
process. In view of complaint, documents produced and verification in the form of affidavit of evidence, there are
sufficient grounds for proceeding further against accused person(s) for offence punishable under Section 138 NI
Act.
Hence, accused person(s) be summoned through all permissible modes for offence punishable
u/s 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act on filing of PF/RC within two weeks. 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.
Put up for appearance of accused on 03.10.2026.
(Arvind Tomar)
JMFC (NI ACT)-07 (Central)/THC
13.02.2026
-- 1 of 1 --