Final Order 1

Order Details: copy of Order
Pdf Text: 1 C.C. NO. 1030/Misc./2025.
ORDER BELOW APPLICATION VIDE EXH. 1
FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN C.C. NO. 1030/MISC./2025.
The present application is filed for the condonation of delay
occurred for filing the complaint for offence punishable under section
138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The application discloses
that, the complainant was under medical treatment. Therefore, he was
unable to attend the Court due to his medical emergency. Therefore,
delay occurred for filing the present complaint. Lastly, the complainant
prayed for condonation ten days delay occurred in filing the present
complaint. Notice issued to the accused through Registered Post.
However, it returned back with the endorsement ‘Unclaimed’. It
amounts to due service of notice.
2. Issuance of cheque, it’s presentation, it’s dishonour, issue of
demand notice after dishonour of cheque and service of demand notice
i.e. requirements to attract section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments
Act, 1881, have been taken place within statutory limitation.
Admittedly, there is delay. However, the complainant filed affidavit vide
Exh.6 in support to application whereby he affirms that, during the
above period he was under medical treatment. In support of that
contention complainant has filed on record copy of medical certificate
issued by Dr. Pradeep Bhagat, Dombivli (West), Mumbai.
3. On the contrary, accused failed to appear and not contested
the application. Therefore, there is nothing available on record to
disbelieve the version of the petitioner. As a result, reasons for delay
shown in the application appear to be satisfactory. At this juncture, it is
necessary to take a resort to the Judgment of Hon'ble Kerala High Court
reported in the case of
''Sathya Narayanan Vs. Preethi 2016(2) DCR
-- 1 of 3 --
2 C.C. NO. 1030/Misc./2025.
679'' Wherein Hon'ble High Court observed that the provision under
section 142(v) should be liberally construed so as to give substantial
justice to the approaching party and there is no hard and fast rule as to
what constitutes sufficient cause to condone the delay. It must be
determined by the reference to the facts and circumstances of each case.
On the above grounds, delay caused in filing the complaint will have to
be condoned.
4. In view of reasons mentioned in the application, it appears
that, the delay caused for filing the complaint is not deliberate and
intentional. Further, there is no laxity on the part of applicant.
Therefore, in the interest of justice and in view of above discussion,
application deserves to be allowed. In the result, following order is
passed :
ORDER
[1] The delay caused for filing the complaint is
condoned.
[2] The case be registered as per rules.
Date :28/11/2025 (G. M. Charankar),
Judicial Magistrate (First Class)
73rd Court, Vikhroli, Mumbai.
-- 2 of 3 --
3 C.C. NO. 1030/Misc./2025.
-- 3 of 3 --