Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
ARVIND KUMAR MISHRA, J.
VIVEK KUMER NEGI - Appellant
Vs.
STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER - Respondents
Application U/S 482 No. 10893 of 2019
Decided On : 11-04-2019
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 – Section 143(A) (1) – Proceedings were launched in the month of May, 2018 and that way the award of interim maintenance was not justified and the same is illegal – Challenged – Held, In so far as amendment is concerned, amendment is of procedural nature and not of substantive nature – Moreover in matters of applicability of the amendment (under Section 143(A), proceedings launched in the matters pending prior to the incorporation of the amendment, there is no express bar in the Act – It being so, the amendment will be applicable even to the proceeding pending prior to the date of incorporation of the amendment as 143(A) in the matters involving provisions of the Negotiable instrument Act, 1881 – Therefore, impugned order passed by the Presiding Officer for offence under Section 138 N.I. Act, 1881 – Petition dismissed. (Para 4 and 5)
Facts of the case:
Proceedings were launched in the month of May, 2018 and that way the award of interim maintenance was not justified and the same is illegal.
Findings of the case:
In so far as amendment is concerned, amendment is of procedural nature and not of substantive nature – Moreover in matters of applicability of the amendment (under Section 143(A), proceedings launched in the matters pending prior to the incorporation of the amendment, there is no express bar in the Act – It being so, the amendment will be applicable even to the proceeding pending prior to the date of incorporation of the amendment as 143(A) in the matters involving provisions of the Negotiable instrument Act, 1881 – Therefore, impugned order passed by the Presiding Officer for offence under Section 138 N.I. Act, 1881.
Result: Petition dismissed
Arvind Kumar Mishra, J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant contended that Section 143(A)(1) of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 has been inserted by Act No.20 of 2018 and has its effect from 1.9.2018, whereas in this case the proceedings were launched in the month of May, 2018 and that way the award of interim maintenance was not justified and the same is illegal.
3. The point in issue whether the amendment brought and incorporated under Section 143(A) (1) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') is applicable retrospectively nor not?
4. In so far as amendment is concerned, the amendment is of procedural nature and not of substantive nature. Moreover in matters of applicability of the amendment (under Section 143(A), proceedings launched in the matters pending prior to the incorporation of the amendment, there is no express bar in the Act. It being so, the amendment will be applicable even to the proceeding pending prior to the date of incorporation of the amendment as 143(A) in the matters involving provisions of the Negotiable instrument Act, 1881. Therefore, impugned order dated 11.1.2019 passed by the Presiding Officer, Additional Court No.2, Gautam Budh Nagar in Complaint Case No.1397 of 2018 for offence under Section 138 N.I. Act, 1881, Police Station Sector-20 NOIDA, District Gautam Budh Nagar, pending the court of 2nd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gautam Budh Nagar is just and does not require any interference.
5. Accordingly, this application is rejected.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
