Interim Order 1

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: Case No. 4132/2026
Hevlon Cosmetics Vs. Ambuj Awasthi
12.06.2026
Fresh complaint case u/s 138 N.I. Act is received. It be checked and
registered as per rules.
Present: AR of complainant with Ld. counsel.
"Evidence by way of affidavit tendered by the com-
plainant. Documents exhibited. Pre-summoning evidence stands closed.
Arguments on cognizance heard.
I have gone through the entire record including the com-
plaint and the documents. It is alleged that accused has issued the cheque
in question to the complainant to discharge his liability. On its presenta-
tion the same was dishonored. Therefore, demand notice was sent to the
accused by the complainant. Despite service / deemed service of said no-
tice, accused has failed to make the payment as per provisions of Nego-
tiable Instruments Act.
Complaint is filed within the prescribed period of limita-
tion.
The counsel for the complainant requests that the pre-
summoning may be carried out in absence of AR of the complainant in
terms of the dictum of A C Narayanan judgment. She/He further submits
that dictum of A C Narayanan is also applicable to complaints u/s 138 NI
Act.
In matter of “A. C. Narayanan Vs. State of Maharash-
tra & Anr.” (2014) 11 SCC 790, Full Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court
of India has held that “...it is a matter of discretion and the Magistrate is
not bound to call upon the complainant to remain present before the court
and to examine him upon oath for taking decision whether or not to issue
process on the complaint under Section 138 of the NI Act. For the pur-
pose of issuing process under Section 200 of the Code, it is open to the
Magistrate to rely upon the verification in the form of affidavit filed by
-- 1 of 2 --
the complainant in support of the complaint under Section 138 of the NI
Act...”
Complaint, affidavit of evidence and documents consid-
ered in light of above cited judgment. In opinion of this Court, there is
no need to examine the complainant's evidence for purpose of issuance of
process. In view of complaint, documents produced and verification in
the form of affidavit of evidence, there are sufficient grounds for proceed-
ing further against accused person(s) for offence punishable under Sec-
tion 138 NI Act.
Cognizance of the offence is taken. For the reasons cited
above, accused be summoned for offence u/s 138 of Negotiable Instru-
ments 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. Steps be taken within 30 days from
today. Ahlmad to issue summons within 10 days from filing of PF. Let
summons be also issued upon accused through whatsApp upon providing
of such details on affidavit by complainant. Complainant is also at liberty
to accompany the process server for effective service of summons.
Matter be taken up now on 04.12.2026.
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 al-
lowed by the Court without imposing any costs on the accused.”
(SANYAM JAIN)
JMFC-04 /North-West/ Delhi
12.06.2026
-- 2 of 2 --