Interim Order 3

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: 99 CC NI ACT / 2561/2025 DAMANINDER SINGH JUNEJA Vs. ASHOK KUMAR
HANDA
20.11.2025
There is pendency of more than 22,000 cases in the present court, therefore, it is not
possible to give shorter date in the cases.
Today, the undersigned is looking after the work of link ACJM-01.
Present : Sh. Shourya Uppal, Ld. Counsel for complainant.
Matter is listed for appearance of proposed accused in terms of
proviso section 223 (1) of BNSS.
Tracking report filed by the Ld. counsel for complainant.
It appears that the proposed accused has been served on 10.10.25.
Since the proposed accused has failed to enter appearance and put
forth submissions on the point as to why cognizance should not be taken against him in
the instant prosecution at hand, this court shall proceed with issuance of summons.
It is clarified that one effective opportunity has already been given to
the proposed accused and the requirement of serving the proposed accused with a
notice prior to taking cognizance u/s 138 NI Act has been successfully complied with.
A perusal of the file reveals that cheque bearing no. 000017 was
issued on 28.12.24. The same was returned on 08.01.25 with the comment ‘drawers
signature differs’. The legal demand notice was sent on 23.01.25 (the day on which the
return memo is received is excluded for the purposes of calculating the period of
limitation for sending the legal demand notice within 30 days). The legal demand
notice was delivered on 24.01.25. The present complaint came to be efiled on 22.02.25.
The same appears to be within the period of limitation.
Pre-summoning evidence by way of affidavit and other annexed
documents perused. This court finds sufficient material to proceed ahead with the case
at hand. I take cognizance of the offence punishable u/s 138 NI Act.
Following the law laid down in
A. C. Narayanan Vs. State of
Maharashtra & Anr.” (2014) 11 SCC 790, complaint, pre-summoning evidence by way
of affidavit and other documents considered. In view of the same, there are sufficient
grounds for proceeding further against accused ASHOK KUMAR HANDA, for
offence punishable under Section 138 N. I. Act. I hereby summon the said accused
person.
Ahlmad is hereby directed to issue summons against the accused
persons on filing of P.F./R.C./Approved Courier as well as through e mail ID and
whatsapp number of accused persons on furnishing of the correct e mail ID and
whatsapp Number of the accused persons by the complainant. The complainant is at
liberty to get the summons served through all permissible modes including electronic
and dasti.
The process server is directed to serve the summons by way of
affixation in terms of section 65 CrPC (section 67 of BNSS, 2023), if premises found
closed or same could not be served personally or on any adult male member.
Further, the complainant is to file an affidavit to the effect that the
service of summons has been effected via e mail and/or whatsapp number of the
accused. The affidavit is to be annexed along with certificate u/s 65 B of Indian
Evidence Act (section 63 of BSA, 2023). A digital copy of screenshot of such service
be necessarily attached with a report on summons.
As per the guidelines laid down in Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayyed
Baba Lal H22, Ahlmad is directed to make a mention on the summons issued against the
accused 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 cost on the accused.”
The Ahlmad is directed to mention the official email Id and video
conferencing link of this Court on the summons. Complainant is directed to file PF and
take steps within 4 weeks including providing copy(ies) of complaint. Matter be fixed
for appearance of accused and framing of notice on 12.02.2026.
(Anjali Singh)
JMFC (NI Act) – 03/PHC/ND/20.11.2025
22 (2010) 5 SCC 663
-- 1 of 1 --