Interim Order 1

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: Case No. 4742/2026
Tanishq Arora U/G Jyoti Arora Vs. Subhash
08.07.2026
Fresh complaint case u/s 138 N.I. Act is received. It be checked and
registered as per rules.
Present: Sh. Ashish Verma, Ms. Aatika & Sh. Bhupinder, Ld.
counsels for the complainant.
"Evidence by way of affidavit tendered by the com
plainant. Documents exhibited. Presummoning 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 and his minor son to discharge his liabil
ity. On its presentation the same was dishonored. Therefore, demand no
tice was sent to the accused by the complainant. Despite service / deemed
service of said notice, accused has failed to make the payment as per pro
visions of Negotiable Instruments Act. Affidavit of the mother of minor
complainant is on record as per which the mother is authorized to contest
the proceedings on behalf of her minor son. In support of his argumentd,
Ld. counsel for complainant has quoted the judgement of Hon’ble
Supreme Court titled as “Associated Cement Ltd. Vs. Keshav Anand
(1998) 1 SCC 687” and “MMTC Ltd. Vs. M/s. Medchi Chemicals and
Pharma Pvt. Ltd (2002) 1 SCC 234”.
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.
-- 1 of 3 --
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 read with sec
tion 26 of NI Act. For the purpose 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 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 pro
ceeding further against accused person(s) for offence punishable under
Section 138 NI Act read with section 26 of NI Act .
Cognizance of the offence is taken. For the reasons cited
above, accused be summoned for offence u/s 138 of Negotiable In
struments Act read with section 26 of NI Act on filing of PF/RC. In
the event the house/office/premises is found to be locked/refusal to ac
cept the service/any other contingency the process be served through af
fixation. Steps be taken within 30 days from today. Ahlmad to issue sum
mons within 10 days from filing of PF. Let summons be also issued
through all modes 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
-- 2 of 3 --
application for compounding of the offence at the first and second hear
ing of the case and if such an application is made, compounding may be
allowed by the Court without imposing any costs on the accused.”
(ISHA RANA)
Relieving JMFC/NorthWest/ Delhi
08.07.2026
-- 3 of 3 --