IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
M.S.Sonak, R.N.Laddha, JJ.
Shaikh Mohammed Tauseef – Appellant
Versus
Gogi Constructions – Respondent
Criminal Writ Petition No. 73 of 2022
Decided On : 11-07-2022
Negotiable Instruments Act - Delay in Providing Certified Copies - Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Sec. 353(1) and Sec. 353(4) of Cr.P.C.
Fact of the Case:
The Petitioner filed criminal complaints against the Respondents under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The accused were convicted and sentenced, but the certified copies of the judgments were not provided for over 16 months.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the JMFC failed to provide certified copies of the judgments within a reasonable period, which was a serious issue.
Issues: Delay in providing certified copies, failure to comply with statutory provisions, and the impact on the accused persons' rights.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of promptly providing certified copies of judgments, especially in cases where the accused persons are convicted.
Final Decision: The Court directed the JMFC to provide certified copies of the judgments within 10 days and ordered administrative action to ensure compliance.
JUDGMENT
1. Heard Mr. Ravi Gawas for the Petitioner.
2. The Petitioner had instituted two criminal complaints against M/s. Gogi Construction and its Partners, i.e., Respondents No.1 to 4 under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (said Act), registered as Criminal Case Nos. 161/NI/OA/2016/A and 162/NI/OA/2016/A.
3. The Petitioner has pleaded that on 5/3/2021, Judicial Magistrate First Class at Quepem, A Court (JMFC) convicted the accused persons for the offense under Sec. 138 of the said Act; directed them to pay the cheque amount, and sentenced them for onemonth imprisonment, in default of payment for six months simple imprisonment. However, on the same day, the accused applied for suspension of sentence. Accordingly, the JMFC promptly suspended the sentence for 30 days to enable the accused persons to institute an appeal against the conviction.
4. The Petitioner has pleaded that on 28/5/2021, the Petitioner applied for urgent certified copies of the Judgments and Orders made in both the cases against receipt Nos. 18882 and 18883 dtd. 28/5/2021. The Petitioner visited the Court several times to collect the certified copies. Still, the staff always informed the Petitioner that the Judgments were not ready and that the certified copies would be supplied after 15 days. Additionally, the Petitioner has pleaded that the Judgments have not even been uploaded on the website of the Court.
5. The Petitioner, therefore, wrote to the Principal District Judge, South Goa, at Margao on 25/10/2021, but there was no response. The Petitioner, by his application dtd. 9/7/2021, in both the cases, requested the JMFC to issue a non-bailable warrant against the accused persons. But such applications are not disposed of and are still pending.
6. The Petitioner has pleaded that, to his surprise, the accused persons instituted Criminal Appeals No.52/2021 and 53/2021 before the Additional Sessions Judge (DJ-2), South Goa at Margao, without certified copies of the Judgments and Orders convicting them. Accordingly, the Office of the Sessions Judge, South Goa, at Margao has registered these two appeals. Though the appeal Court grants no interim relief, the accused persons remain at liberty despite the orders of conviction and sentence only because the JMFC has, to date, not furnished the certified copies of her Judgments and Orders.
7. Since the above situation was quite disturbing, we, by our Order dtd. 4/7/2022, called for a report from the Principal District Judge, South Goa latest by 8/7/2022, to ascertain the position. As a result, the Principal District Judge, South Goa, has submitted a report dtd. 7/7/2022, substantially confirming all that the Petitioner has pleaded.
8. The report confirms that the JMFC, by her Judgment and Order dtd. 5/3/2021, convicted and sentenced the accused persons but then suspended the sentence on the accused persons' application. Accordingly, the accused persons applied for certified copies of the Judgments and Orders dtd. 5/3/2021 on the same day, i.e., on 5 th March 2021. On this application, the JMFC passed an order dated 8 th March 2021 for issuing certified copies by giving the date as 10/3/2021.
9. The report states that no certified copy was issued on 10/3/2021. The accused persons preferred Criminal Appeals No.52/2021 and 53/2021 to the Sessions Court without certified copies of the impugned Judgments and Orders. They, however, filed an undertaking/application for production of the certified copies no sooner than the same were received or uploaded on the CIS.
10. The Appeal Court called for record and proceedings on 21/2/2022. Because the same was not transmitted, the Appeal Court sent a reminder on 8/3/2022, to the JMFC. This was followed by reminders on 9/3/2022 and 5/4/2022. Yet another reminder was issued on 18/4/2022. Despite all these reminders, the JMFC neither forwarded the records nor did she issue the certified copies of the Judgments and Orders dtd. 5/3/2021.
11. On 13/6/2022, the Appeal Cou
Prompt provision of certified copies of judgments, especially in cases of conviction, is essential to uphold the rights of the parties involved.
Quasi-judicial authorities must pronounce reasoned orders in open court with immediate file availability; certified copies require date endorsements for limitation exclusion; detailed procedural dire....
Trial proceedings may continue despite delays in document provision, as long as sufficient opportunity for defense is granted.
The judgment must be in writing, signed, and dated on the date of pronouncement, as per the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code.
The court emphasized the importance of addressing the delay in issuance of certified copies and the serious concern regarding missing records, highlighting the potential threat of misuse and the sign....
The court emphasized the discretionary power of the court to condone procedural defects in appeals and highlighted that the interest of justice should not be constrained by hyper-technical interpreta....
The court emphasized that a satisfactory explanation for delay in filing an appeal is essential, particularly when substantial time has elapsed since the judgment.
The court exercised its supervisory powers under Article 227 to ensure procedural fairness by requiring the issuance of certified copies.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.