Order 4

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: 4 CC NI ACT - 1321-2024 Atlantic Publishers And Distributors
Pvt Ltd Through Its Authorized Representative Vs. Manoj Bhatia
22.06.2024
Present: Mr. Prashant Singh, Ld. Counsel for the complainant
with new AR Sh. Aman Kodwani.
Counsel for the complainant has filed an application
for substitution of AR along with the board resolution with respect
to the proposed AR of the complainant company as the previous
AR has left the job. Same is taken on record.
Heard and allowed.
Let the AR Sh. Aman Kodwani be substituted in place
of previous AR. Counsel for complainant is directed to file the
evidence affidavit of new AR on NDOH.
Ld. Counsel for complainant has made an oral request
for amendment of the complaint on the ground that due to
inadvertence, the complainant has failed to implead the drawer of
the cheque i.e. Bhatia Book Depot as an accused in the array of
parties.
Amended complaint alongwith amended memo of
parties, list of witnesses / documents and vakalatnama filed.
Since, by virtue of the amended complaint, the
complainant seeks to implead the drawer of the cheque i.e. Bhatia
Book Depot as an accused in the array of parties, oral request for
amendement of complaint is allowed. Amended complaint
alongwith amended memo of parties are taken on record.
-- 1 of 3 --
-2-
Arguments on the point of maintainability of the case
heard.
As per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
A.C. Narayanan Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. (2014) 11 SCC
790, Full Bench, examination of the complainant upon oath for
issuance of process is a matter of discretion of the Magistrate. In
the considered opinion of this court, there is no need to examine
the complainant for the purpose of issuance of process. There is
sufficient material before this court to proceed against the accused
no.1, 2 and 3. Accordingly, PSE is being dispensed with.
I have perused the complaint u/s 138 NI Act, evidence
by the way of affidavit of the complainant and the documents relied
upon by the complainant.
Heard. Case file is perused.
In the present case, upon perusal of documents
annexed and inquiry u/s 202 Cr.P.C. I am prima facie convinced
that the offence of dishonour of cheque u/s 138 NI Act has been
made out against the accused. As per the averments made in the
present complaint, this court has the territorial jurisdiction to
entertain the complaint. Complaint has been filed within the
limitation period. All other statutory requirements have been
fulfilled.
There is sufficient material on record to proceed
against accused no.1, 2 and 3 as prima facie offence u/s 138 NI Act
-- 2 of 3 --
-3-
appears to have been committed. I hereby take cognizance of the
same.
Let summons be issued to accused no.1, 2 and 3 on
filing of PF/RC/Speed post / electronic mode within 60 days and
authorized courier returnable on 19.10.2024.
No offence u/s 138 of the NI Act is made out against
accused no.4 as accused no.4 is neither the partner of Bhatia Book
Depot and nor she is shown as the signatory in the account opening
form placed on record by the bank witness.
Complainant is also at liberty to furnish email or
whatsapp number of accused on the PF form for effective service
through electronic mode.
Complainant is also directed to file PF and provide the
copy/ies of the complaint to the accused, otherwise the complaint
may be dismissed u/s 204 (4) Cr.PC.
In case of refusal, non-availability or premises of the
accused is found locked, summons be served by way of affixation.
Counsel for complainant is directed to place on
record the proof of the diet money paid the bank witness on
NDOH.
(Neha Garg)
MM (NI Act)-02- PHC
NDD-ND-22.06.2024
-- 3 of 3 --