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

2022 Supreme(P&H) 984

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Karamjit Singh, J.
Gura Singh - Appellant
Versus
Gagandeep Singh - Respondent
CRM-M-17633 of 2022
Decided On : 28-04-2022

Advocates:
Mr. Nikhil K Vashisht, Advocate, for the Appellant

The provision of Section 143(A) of the Negotiable Instruments Act is directory in nature and not mandatory.

Headnote:

Section 143(A) - Negotiable Instruments Act - The court held that the provision of Section 143(A) of the Negotiable Instruments Act is directory in nature and not mandatory, and that the trial court's order granting interim compensation to the complainant was non-speaking and contrary to the settled position of law.

Fact of the Case:

The respondent filed a criminal complaint against the petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The trial court directed the petitioner to pay interim compensation to the respondent to the tune of 20% of the cheque amount, citing Section 143(A) of the Act.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the trial court's order granting interim compensation was non-speaking and contrary to the settled position of law, as the provision of Section 143(A) of the Negotiable Instruments Act is directory in nature and not mandatory.

Issues: The issue was whether the trial court's order directing the petitioner to pay interim compensation to the respondent under Section 143(A) of the Negotiable Instruments Act was valid.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the provision of Section 143(A) of the Negotiable Instruments Act is directory in nature and not mandatory, and that the trial court's order granting interim compensation to the complainant was non-speaking and contrary to the settled position of law.

Final Decision: The petition was allowed, and the impugned order directing the petitioner to pay interim compensation to the respondent was set aside. The matter was remanded back to the trial court to dispose of the issue regarding interim compensation in accordance with the law.

JUDGMENT

Karamjit Singh, J. - The present petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking quashing of the order dated 05.04.2021 (Annexure P-1) passed by Ld. CJM, Faridkot, in criminal complaint/NACT-888/2019, dated 4.10.2017, Gagandeep Singh Vs. Gura Singh, to the extent whereby the said Court directed the petitioner to pay interim compensation to the respondent to the tune of 20% of the cheque amount, as per the provisions of Section 143(A) of Negotiable Instruments Act.

2. The brief facts of the case are that respondent Gagandeep Singh has filed aforesaid criminal complaint against the present petitioner under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. On the completion of preliminary evidence, the petitioner was summoned and he appeared before the Trial Court and was granted bail. The Trial Court on 5th April, 2021 passed the following order:-

    'Present: Sh. GS Brar, Advocate counsel for complainant.

    Accused on bail with counsel Sh. JS Dhillon, Advocate.

    As per the latest provision by insertion of Section 143(A) of Negotiable Instrument Act, as the accused is to pay interim compensation to the complainant to the tune of 20% of the cheque amount. Hence, in view of the said statutory provision, accused is directed to pay interim compensation of 20% of cheque amount within period of 60 days to complainant.

    Heard on arguments on the notice of accusation. A prima facie case is being made out against the accused for the commission of offences punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act. Accordingly, notice of accusation has bee served upon the accused, for the same to which, the accused pleaded not guilt and claimed trial. Now, case is adjourned to 26.05.2021 for evidence of the complainant.

    Dated:5.4.2021

    Sd/-

    JMIC/Faridkot/'

    3. The petitioner has not challenged the aforesaid order to the extent whereby notice of accusation was served upon him. However, he being aggrieved of the order passed by the trial Court under Section 143(A) of Negotiable Instruments Act, the petitioner has filed the present petition.

    4. The counsel for the petitioner contended that the impugned order whereby the petitioner has been directed to pay interim compensation to the complainant as per the provisions of Section 143(A) of Negotiable Instruments Act, is totally illegal, being passed in mechanical manner without application of mind. The counsel further contended that recently Delhi High Court in CRL.MC 2663 of 2021 M/s Jsb Cargo and Freight Forwarder Pvt. Ltd Vs. State and another, decided on 20.12.2021, held that provision of Section 143(A) Negotiable Instruments Act, essentially is directory and cannot be termed as mandatory in nature. The counsel further contended that it appears that the trial Court gave the impugned direction, having the impression that the aforesaid provision is mandatory in nature. The counsel further contended that the impugned order to the extent stated above is liable to be set aside.

    5. I have considered the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner.

    6. This Court is of the view that the present petition can be disposed of without issuing any notice to the opposite party, for the reasons stated herein below.

    7. Admittedly, the Delhi High Court in M/s Jsb Cargo (supra) remitted the matter to trial Court after holding that provision of Section 143(A) of Negotiable Instruments Act, is only directory in nature. Even the Karnataka High Court in Criminal Petition No.100261/2022 Vijaya Vs. Shekharappa and another decided 17.02.2022 reported in 2022 Live Law (Kar) 82, has also taken similar view.

    8. Admittedly, no opportunity was given to the petitioner to file his response, before passing of the impugned order despite the fact that he had not pleaded guilty to the notice of accusation served upon him under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. From the perusal of impugned order, it appears that the Trial Court granted interim compensation under Section 143(A) of Negotiable Instruments Act just in a routine manner and t

    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