Interim Order 7

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: 14 CC NI ACT 26203/2023 HERO FINCORP LTD Vs. MAKWANA HARESH BHAI
GHUSABHAI
26.09.2026
This court has a pendency of more than 38000 cases. Shorter dates are not given on account
of heavy pendency.
Present: Sh. Sunil, Ld. Counsel for complainant.
Matter is fixed for arguments on application for condonation of delay.
Despite repeated calls, none has appeared on behalf of the proposed accused.
Accordingly the arguments are being heard ex-parte.
Ld. Counsel for complainant submits that there is a delay of 03 days in the matter.
Ld. Counsel for complainant further submits that the delay in the filing of the said
complaint was on account of the fact that there is bulk filing by the panel counsel and on account of
some server error, the e-filing could not be done in time.
In view of the reasons stated in the application, arguments advanced, the application
for condonation of delay stands allowed and the delay of 03 days stands condoned subject to cost of
Rs.100/- to be deposited with DLSA, PHC NDD, ND.
Arguments on summoning heard.
I have gone through the entire record including the complaint and the documents. It
is alleged that accused has executed the cheque in question in favour of 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. Complaint is prima facie filed
within the prescribed period of limitation.
Accordingly, this court takes cognizance of the offence punishable under Section 138
of Negotiable Instruments Act.
Following the law laid down in A.C. Narayanan Vs. State of Maharashtra (2014) 11
SCC 790, complaint, affidavit of evidence and other annexed documents considered. Accordingly,
there is no need to examine the complainant for the purpose of issuance of process.
Inquiry U/Sec.202 Cr.P.C. is conducted vide examination of documents and this
court is satisfied that there are sufficient grounds for proceeding to issue summons against the
accused.
Hence, let the accused be summoned through all permissible modes for offence
under section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act on filing of PF/RC. 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. PF be filed within 12 months.
Let summons be also issued upon accused through whatsapp and email as well and
the affidavit of service be filed by the complainant before the NDOH.
Complainant is directed to file the internet tracking report qua the said summons on
or before the NDOH. Complainant is further directed to supply copy of complete set of documents
filed in the court including the evidence affidavit of the complainant. Ld. Counsel for the
complainant is also directed to file the duly filled mandatory NI Act complaint Meta Data Form
before filing first PF.
Further, as per the guidelines laid down as in the case titled as “Damodar S. Prabhu
Vs. Sayed Babalal H”, AIR2010(SC) 1907, Ahlmad is directed to make a mention on the summons
issued against the accused (by adding separate sheet, if required) 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 costs on the
accused.”
Put up for appearance of accused/framing of notice on 29.06.2028.
(Akanksha Singh)
JMFC(NIAct)/02/PHC
NDD-ND-26.09.2026
-- 1 of 1 --