Interim Order 3

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: 152 CC NI ACT / 67064/2025 Kamal Encon Industries Ltd Vs. INDTRONIC
25.03.2026
There is pendency of more than 35,000 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 2nd link JMFC.
Present : Sh. Asheesh Kumar Mishra, Ld. Counsel for complainant.
Matter is listed for compliance/ consideration on summoning.
GST record filed. Taken on record.
Perusal of the GST document reveals that Mastan Sheikh is the proprietor
of the accused proprietorship.
In terms of the memo of parties, complainant also seeks to array one
Maksood Mehmood Khan on the ground that he claims to be new proprietor.
In terms of settled law, the court shall consider taking cognizance only
against the current proprietor duly reflected on the GST document.
A perusal of the file reveals that cheque bearing no. 000112 was issued on
24.04.25. The same was returned on 17.07.25 with the comment ‘drawers signature differs’.
The legal demand notice was sent on 14.08.25 (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 deemed to have been
delivered on 19.08.25. Henceforth, the legal demand notice is deemed to be served u/s 27 of
the General Clauses Act read with section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act. The present
complaint came to be filed on 27.09.25. 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 Mastan Sheikh (Prop. of INDTRONIC), 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 H3, 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 10.06.26.
Let an amended memo of parties be filed on the NDOH.
(Anjali Singh)
JMFC (NI Act) – 03/PHC/ND/25.03.2026
3 (2010) 5 SCC 663
-- 1 of 1 --