Order 23

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: 71 CC NI ACT / 24783/2024 Management And Entrepreneurship
And Professional Skills Council Vs. Av Industries And Others
11.12.2025
There is pendency of more than 27,000 cases in the present court, therefore, it is not
possible to give shorter date in the cases.
Present : Sh. Raj Kumar Mittal and Sh Ajay Kapoor, Ld. Counsel for
complainant through VC. (M-9810199805)
Sh Tausif Alam, Ld. Counsel for proposed accused No.1 to 3.
Matter is listed for report on notice to proposed accused no.4
and 5.
Notice has already been served to proposed accused no.1 to
3. On the LDOH, application moved by the Ld. Counsel for complainant for
impleadment of proposed accused no.4 and 5 stood allowed.
Since the proposed accused No.4 and 5 have failed to enter
appearance despite service of notice and put forth submissions on the point
as to why cognizance should not be taken against them 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.
Vide separate order of even date, it is clarified that the court
is not taking cognizance against proposed accused no.3 KM Seth.
At this stage, Ld. Counsel for proposed accused no.1 and 2
has relied upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Hariharan
Krishan Vs. J. Thomas to state that the application for impleadment filed by
the complainant is at a later point in time and beyond the period of
limitation of filing the complaint. He further states that a prosecution U/s
138 of the NI Act is person specific and cannot be held without an accused.
The court shall proceed with deciding on the point of
cognizance qua accused no.1, 2, 4 and 5.
A perusal of the file reveals that cheque bearing no. 000678
was issued on 15.4.2024. The same was returned on 04.05.24 with the
comment ‘funds insufficient’. The legal demand notice was sent on 10.05.24
(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 13.05.2024. The
present complaint came to be efiled on 21.06.2024. 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
no.1 Av Industries, accused no.2 Vinod Khanna, accused no.3 Sheetal
Khanna, accused no.4 Shikhar Khanna, for offence punishable under
Section 138 N. I. Act. I hereby summon the said accused person.
-- 1 of 2 --
-2-
No summons have been issued qua accused no.1 and 2 as
ld.counsel is representing the accused firm and accused no.2.
Ahlmad is hereby directed to issue summons against the
accused persons No.3 and 4 o
n 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 H1, 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 23.02.2026.
Ld. Counsel for complainant is directed to furnish an
amended memo of parties in terms of summoning order today.
(Anjali Singh)
JMFC (NI Act) – 03/PHC/ND/11.12.2025
1 (2010) 5 SCC 663
-- 2 of 2 --