Final Order 3

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: IN THE COURT OF Ms. KIRAN BANSAL: ASJ04,
SHAHDARA: KKD COURTS, DELHI
CR REV No. 143/2023
Shambhu Sharma
S/o Late Shri Jai Narain Sharma
House No.6/6, Kaveri City, PS Loni,
Ghaziabad, UP201102.
....Petitioner/Revisionist
VERSUS
Gautam Singh
S/o Shri Raghunath Singh
M/s. Kanhaiya Ji Sanitary Imporium
4, Old Anarkali Ext., Main Road, Ram Nagar,
Krishna Nagar, Delhi51.
....Respondent
02.08.2023
Present: Petitioner in person.
Ld. Proxy counsel for the respondent.
1. Present Revision petition has been filed by petitioner
Shambhu Sharma assailing the impugned order dated
01.05.2023 passed by the Ld. MM in the complaint case filed
by the respondent Gautam Singh against the present petitioner
under Section 138 N I Act. Vide the impugned order, the Ld.
Magistrate has allowed the application under Section 143 A N I
CRID No. 143/2023 1/5
-- 1 of 5 --
Act and has directed accused / petitioner to pay the 10% of the
impugned cheque amount.
2. It is stated that the object of the amended Section 143 A is to
support only the genuine complaints and not the fraudulent
claims of the complainant. It is stated that the second and third
page of the impugned order itself narrates the sequence of the
events showing friendly loan received by the petitioner in the
year 2016 but the delivery of the cheque only in the year 2019
i.e., after the gap of three years which is highly improbable and
falsifies the genuine claim of the respondent. As per the
petitioner, his signed cheques were stolen by the respondent in
the year 2015 which he did not suspected unless he received
threat calls from the respondent in the year 2019 to blackmail
and to harass and to pay Rs.10 lacs to Rs.15 lacs.
3. As per the petitioner he has made complaint of extortion,
cheating etc. against the complainant to the police as well as in
the court. The petitioner has further stated that he used to pre
sign his cheques in routine ready for use by his family members
and he used to keep presign cheque book in his scooter dicky
and this fact was known to the respondent who was a friend of
the petitioner. As per the petitioner, the complainant has used
two cheques out of the nine stolen cheques.
4. The petitioner has also stated that he did not receive the legal
notice and the legal notice shows the forged thumb impression
CRID No. 143/2023 2/5
-- 2 of 5 --
of the wife of the petitioner. As per the petitioner, the facts
stated by him are more plausible and probable whereas the facts
stated by the complainant / respondent suggest that they are
false. As the petitioner / accused has denied his liability before
the trial court therefore the claim of the complainant /
respondent for interim maintenance is unjustified. Moreover,
complainant has not brought on record any evidence of money
transaction. On these grounds, he has prayed that impugned
order dated 01.05.2023 be set aside.
5. Notice of the petition was furnished to the respondent/complaint
who appeared through counsel and has advanced arguments
directly without filing any formal reply.
6. Perused the record of the present case as well as the TCR.
7. Ld. counsel for petitioner has relied upon the another order of
Ld. MM, East dated 24.05.2023 in CC No.2211/19 in which
another complainant Amar Jyoti Kumar had moved a similar
application under Section 143 A for grant of interim
compensation but the Ld. MM vide order dated 24.05.2023 has
declined the said request and had dismissed the application
under Section 143 A. The accused in both the cases is same i.e.,
Shambhu Sharma i.e., the petitioner herein. However, in
complaint case No.2422/19 filed by Gautam Singh, Ld. MM
Shahdara has granted the prayer of the respondent / complainant
and has directed the accused to pay 10% of the cheque amount
CRID No. 143/2023 3/5
-- 3 of 5 --
(though the prayer was for payment of 20% of the cheque
amount) as interim compensation. Ld. Counsel for accused has
argued that he has pleaded same defence in both the courts
cases and the Ld. MM in East district had concluded that there
are considerable contested issues between the parties.
8. It is a settled law that the order of Ld. MM East was not binding
on the Ld. MM, Shahdara. Moreover, the impugned order is
dated 01.05.2023 whereas the order of Ld. MM (East) is dated
24.05.2023 which was passed after the impugned order. Also
because Ld. MM (East) has found that there are considerable
contested issues between the parties, the same does not mean
that there is any illegality in the impugned order dated
01.05.2023 of Ld. MM. Shahdara.
9. By impugned order, the Ld. MM has directed the accused to pay
10% of the cheque amount and the Ld. MM has also rightly
observed that in the event of acquittal of the accused, the
complainant shall be directed to repay the said amount with
interest at the prevailing bank rate and thus, has protectd the
interest of the present petitioner/accused.
10. The Ld. MM has rightly observed that the accused has admitted
his signature on the cheque in question. Once the signature on
the cheque are admitted, it is rather in furtherance of the justice
that the accused should be directed to pay interim compensation
to the complainant. The Ld. MM has also taken into account
CRID No. 143/2023 4/5
-- 4 of 5 --
various other factors as Ld. MM has only directed accused to
pay 10% of the cheque amount and not 20% as prayed by the
complainant. No prejudice can be caused to the accused if he
complies the impugned order in as much as he will be getting
his amount along with interest at the prevailing bank rate in case
of acquittal. As far as the genuineness of the claim is
concerned, once the signature on the cheque are admitted, the
onus is on the accused to prove his defence and he can prove the
same at the time of trial.
11. In view of above, I do not find any illegality or impropriety in
the impugned order dated 01.05.2023 passed by Ld. Trial Court,
whereby the application under Section 143A N I Act of the
complainant was allowed. Revision petition is devoid of any
merit and accordingly stands dismissed. Trial Court record be
sent back alongwith a copy of this order. File of the present case
be consigned to record room.
12. Petitioner is directed to comply with the said order within ten
days from the date of this order. .
Announced in the open court on
2nd day of August, 2023.
(KIRAN BANSAL)
ASJ04, Shahdara/KKD Courts,
Delhi/02.08.2023
CRID No. 143/2023 5/5
-- 5 of 5 --