IMPORTANT POINT : : (1) Dishonour of cheques – Single complaint in respect of all six cheques is definitely maintainable – Merely because one of cheques which is subject matter of impugned complaint, had become stale before its presentation for encashment would not offer ground for quashment of complaint as a whole.
(2) Dishonour of cheque – Grant of interim compensation is a discretionary power which has to be exercised by a Magistrate trying a complaint under Section 138 of NI Act and such order has to be based on reason and logic.

Judgment

The petitioner has challenged complaint filed by respondent against him for offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act (for short NI Act), which is pending before the Court of Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class (City Munsiff), Srinagar.

2. As per the impugned complaint, respondent/ complainant had a business transaction with the petitioner. It is alleged that the petitioner issued six cheques for liquidating the liability towards the respondent/complainant. The details of the cheques are as under: –

3. It is alleged that the aforenoted cheques, when presented before the banker for their encashment, were dishonoured for the reasons insufficiency of funds/ payees name required/account frozen by virtue of six separate memos of dishonour. The respondent/ complainant thereafter served a notice of demand for payment of total amount of Rs.26.50 lacs, which was sent through registered post on 10th May, 2019. Even after waiting for the prescribed period, the petitioner/ accused did not pay the cheque amount to the respondent/complainant, as a result whereof the impugned complaint came to be filed before the learned trial Magistrate.

4. Vide order dated 25.06.2019, the learned trial Magistrate issued process against the petitioner. After recording his plea, another order came to be passed by the learned trial Magistrate on 23.07.2021/29.07.2021, whereby interim compensation in terms of Section 143-A of the NI Act to the extent of 20% of the total cheque amount was awarded in favour of the respondent.

5. The petitioner has thrown challenge to the complaint as well as the orders dated 25.06.2019 and 23.07.2021/29.07.2021 by urging several grounds. It has been contended that some of the cheques, which are subject matter of the impugned complaint, were not presented for encashment within the period of their validity, as such, the impugned complaint could not have been lodged on the basis of these stale cheques. In this regard, reference has been made to cheques bearing No.673420 dated 01.02.2019 and 175520 dated 04.01.2019. It has been further contended that the order whereby the interim compensation has been awarded in favour of respondent/complainant bears the date 23.07.2021 when, in fact, on the said date, the learned Presiding Officer was on leave. According to the petitioner, this exhibits lack of application of mind on the part of learned trial court and renders the impugned order illegal. It has also been contended that the impugned order awarding interim compensation in favour of respondent/complainant is devoid of any reasons and, as such, the same deserves to be quashed.

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record including the record of the trial court.

7. The first and foremost ground that has been urged by learned counsel for the petitioner is that some of the cheques which are subject matter of the impugned complaint were stale and, as such, prosecution on the basis of those cheques could not have been initiated.

8. As already noted, reference has been made to cheques dated 01.02.2019 and 04.01.2019. In this regard, a perusal of the record shows that cheque dated 04.01.2019 for an amount of Rs.3.00 lacs drawn on Axis Bank, Srinagar, has been presented for encashment on 2nd May, 2019. The validity of this cheque is three months from the date of its issue. Thus, the contention of the petitioner that this cheque had become stale prior to its presentation for encashme