SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Bom) 491

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY AT AURANGABAD BENCH
Y.G. KHOBRAGADE, J.
Manoj Abhimanyu Patil - Petitioner
Versus
M/s Mansi Labour Suppliers - Respondent
Criminal Writ Petition No. 1068 of 2024
Decided On : 05-02-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
Mr. S. S. Bora, Advocate for the Petitioner,
Mr. Vinod P. Patil, Advocate for the Respondent

The court affirmed that under Section 143A of the NI Act, the power to award interim compensation is discretionary, requiring evaluation of the merits of the case and the accused's defence.

Headnote:

(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482 - Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Section 138 and 143A - Petition challenging the order for interim compensation under Section 143A of the NI Act - The court affirmed the order directing the accused to pay interim compensation of 20% of the cheque amount, emphasizing the presumption of correctness of the debt and the legal liability of the cheque issuer. (Paras 4, 6, 20, 22)

(B) Interim Compensation - The court ruled that the power to award interim compensation under Section 143A is discretionary, requiring the court to evaluate the merits of the case and the defence before granting such compensation. (Paras 14, 21)

(C) Presumption of Debt - The court reiterated that under Sections 118 and 139 of the NI Act, there is a presumption in favor of the complainant regarding the correctness of the debt and the issuance of the cheque for legal liabilities. (Paras 10, 20)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, an accused, issued a cheque for Rs.50 lakhs to the complainant, his brother, as part of an investment agreement. The cheque was returned unpaid, leading to a complaint under Section 138 of the NI Act. The magistrate ordered interim compensation, which was upheld by the Additional Sessions Judge.

Findings of Court:
The courts below found that the cheque was issued to discharge a legal liability, and the presumption under the NI Act favored the complainant.

Issues: The main issues included whether the provisions of Section 143A are mandatory or discretionary and the appropriateness of the interim compensation amount.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that Section 143A is discretionary, requiring a prima facie evaluation of the case's merits and the accused's defence before granting interim compensation.

Result: Petition dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

(Y.G. KHOBRAGADE, J.)

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and with the consent of both the parties heard finally.

2. By the present Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India r/w Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, the Petitioner takes exception to the judgment dated 22.04.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-4, Jalgaon in Criminal Revision Application No. 113/2023, whereby affirmed the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Jamner, below Exh. 19 on 25.09.2023 in S. C. C. No. 739/2022.

3. The Petitioner is the original accused and Respondent is the original complainant in Summary Criminal Case No. 739/2022. (For the sake of brevity, parties to the present petition hereinafter be referred in their original capacity as “accused ” and “complainant”).

4. Shri Dipak Abhimanyu Patil, the Proprietor of the Complainant firm and accused Shri Manoj Abhimanyu Patil are real brothers. By profession, the accused is Tax Consultant since 2006. On 22.02.2017, the Investment Agreement & Memorandum of Understanding was executed between the accused and Complainant. As per the memorandum of understanding, the accused offered monthly 10% profit to the complainant. The complainant invested an amount of Rs.26,54,500/- with the accused. Initially, till 21.03.2018 profit amount was disbursed in favour of the complainant but thereafter, no profit was disbursed. Therefore, total amount of Rs.1,59,27,000/- were outstanding against the accused. On repeated demands, the accused issued a cheque of Rs.50 lakhs bearing No. 128664, dated 26.09.2022, drawn on IDBI Bank, Balaji Market, Pachora Road, Jamner Branch from account No.0659104000101639 in favour of the complainant with assurance that said cheque would be honoured. Accordingly, on 27.09.2022, the complainant presented said cheque for encashment with his Banker HDFC, Jamner Branch. However, the said cheque was returned unpaid with cheque return memo dated 28.09.2022 on ground that “payment of cheque stopped by the drawer.” Therefore, on 30.09.2022, the complainant issued mandatory notice under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act ( for short, NI Act), and called upon the accused to comply with the notice. However, the accused issued reply and denied contents of notice. Therefore, the complainant filed SCC No.739/2022 for the offence punishable under section 138 of the NI Act.

5. After service of summons, the petitioner/accused duly appeared in the matter. Thereafter, the complainant filed Exh. 19 an application under Section 143-A of the NI Act and prayed for issuance of directions against the accused to pay 20% interim compensation of the cheque amount to him. On 25.09.2023, the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Jamner passed an order below Exh.19 and directed the petitioner/accused to pay Rs.10 lakhs to the complainant towards interim compensation under Section 143-A of the NI Act within a period of 60 days and in case the accused is acquitted, the complainant would be liable to repay amount of interim compensation with interest at the bank rate as published by the Reserve Bank of India for the relevant financial year.

6. Being aggrieved by the said order, the accused invoked jurisdiction under section 397 of the Criminal Procedure Code by filing Criminal Revision Application No.113/2023. On 22.04.2024, the learned Additional Sessions Judge-4, Jalgaon passed the impugned order and affirmed the order date 25-09-2023 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate below Exh.19 holding that, the Court is bound to presume correctness of debt and contents of the negotiable instruments as well as fact that the holder of the cheque received the same towards payment of debt or other legal liabilities. Therefore, considering the nature of transaction and cheque was issued towards discharge of legal liability, the order directing payment of interim compensation of 20% of cheque amount provided under section 143 of the NIA Act is p

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top