Full Order Text
Order 8 · 09 Sept 2026 · CNR DLNW020125662024
Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS Pdf Text: 5 CC NI ACT / 1155/2024 Tarun Gupta Vs. Rajendra Ganpat Nogiya /0 (Shalimar Bagh) 09.09.2026 Present: Ld. proxy counsel for complainant. Accused in person with ld. counsels Sh. Mayank Jain and Vivek Balhara. Complainant through VC. Fresh vakalatnama has been filed on behalf of the accused. Same is taken on record. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the accused is admit- ted to bail subject to furnishing of bail bonds in sum of Rs. 40,000/- and one surety of like amount. Surety bonds not furnished. Personal bonds furnished, same are accepted till NDOH. Submissions heard on the point of notice. It has been argued on behalf of complainant there is sufficient material on record to indicate commission of offence u/s. 138 NI Act by the accused. On the other hand, it is argued by counsel for accused that cheques in question have not been issued towards the discharge of any legal liability. Heard. Perused. At this stage, prima facie there is sufficient material on record to proceed against the accused for the commission of offence under Section 138 N.I Act. Notice u/s 285 BNSS read with Section 274 BNSS (old 262 read with Section 251 Cr.PC) framed against the accused wherein the accused pleaded not guilty and claim trial. The defence of the accused has also been duly recorded. Statement of accused u/s. 330 BNSS (old 294 Cr.PC) recorded separately wherein he has admitted the cheques in question and return memos. In view of the same, witness mentioned at serial no. 2, 3 and 4 are dropped from the list of witnesses. There is no application u/s. 145(2) NI Act to cross examine the com- plainant. However, a plausible defence has been raised disclosed in the notice as framed to- day. Ld. Counsel for complainant fairly submits that he has no objection if ac- cused be permitted to cross examine the complainant. In view of the defence raised and in view of no objection of counsel for complainant, accused is permitted to cross examine the complainant on next date of hearing. In view of the defence raised by the accused during framing of notice, this Court believes that there is possibility that trial will take time and accused might be pun- ished for sentence more than one year. Therefore, this Court decides that the present case be tried as summons case. Put up the matter for cross-examination of complainant on 15.03.2027. (SANYAM JAIN) JMFC-04/Rohini Court/NW/ Delhi 09.09.2026 -- 1 of 1 --