Interim Order 2

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: 63 CC NI ACT / 3198/2025 Nand Kishore Goel Vs. Ankit Aggarwal /0 (Keshav Puram)
Proceedings conducted online through video conferencing using CISCO WEBEX software.
(The court is physically operational from Rouse Avenue Court complex.
Work station of the court is functioning from Rohini Court Complex.)
18.11.2025
Present: Sh. Mohd. Ikram, Ld. counsel for complainant.
Sh. Dinesh, Ld. counsel along-with accused. ( 9873588673)
Arguments heard. Records perused.
This Court has perused the complaint, original cheque, bank return memo, legal notice,
postal receipt and service report pertaining to the legal notice. Perusal of the said record reveals that the
present complaint has been filed within limitation and this Court has the territorial jurisdiction to enter-
tain the same. Further, as per the averments made in the complaint,
prima facie, an offence u/s 138 of
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1882 appears to have been committed Therefore, in view of the same, this
Court takes cognizance of offence u/s 138 NI Act.
Hon’ble Supreme Court has laid down in the cases of
AC Narayanan v.
State of Maha-
rastra and
Re Expeditious Trial of NI Act cases that the examination of complainant and his witnesses
on oath is a matter of discretion of the Magistrate and their evidence given on affidavit, if found satis-
factory, maybe read as it is for the purpose of issuance of process. Thus, as the present case has been
filed in complete particulars, this Court does not deem it necessary to call upon the complainant and his
witnesses and conduct their examination on oath.
Considering the averments made in the complaint, documents filed along-with and affi-
davit of the complainant in support of the complaint, this Court finds that there is sufficient material on
record to summon the accused.
Since, the accused has entered into appearance today, summons are deemed to be served
upon him. Complainant is directed to supply copy of complaint to accused by NDOH.
Further, the accused has been informed about the guidelines laid down in the case titled
as “
Damodar S Prabhu v.
Sayed Babala H” that “he 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. And if the application is made
at a subsequent stage, compounding can be allowed subject to the condition that the accused will be re-
quired to pay 10% of the cheque amount to be deposited with the Legal Services Authority or such
other authority as this Court deems fit.”
It is submitted by accused that he is presently residing at R/o 881/57, Lekhu Nagar, Tri
Nagar, Delhi-110035.
Put up for furnishing of bail bond/framing of notice and further proceedings on
19.05.2026.
(Surbhi Sharma)
(JMFC(NI Act) Digital court01)
NorthWest, Rohini
New Delhi/18.11.2025
-- 1 of 1 --