Interim Order 6

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: 16 CC NI ACT / 3281/2024
Vicky Vs. Aakriti Wadhwa
(North Rohini)
16.07.2026
Present: Counsel for complainant through VC.
Arguments on the point of summoning / cognizance heard.
I have gone through the entire record including the complaint and
the documents. It is alleged that accused has issued the cheque in question to 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 ser-
vice / deemed service of said notice, accused has failed to make the payment as per
provisions of Negotiable Instruments Act.
Complaint is filed within the prescribed period of limitation. I
hereby take cognizance.
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 Maharashtra & 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 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 com-
plainant in support of the complaint under Section 138 of the NI Act...”
Complaint, affidavit of evidence and documents considered 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 proceeding further against accused person(s) for offence
punishable under Section 138 NI Act.
Cognizance of the offence is taken. For the reasons cited above,
accused / signatory Aakriti 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 sum-
mons 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 31.03.2027.
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.”
(Reetika Jain)
JMFC-05, North-West
Rohini/Delhi/16.07.2026
-- 1 of 1 --