IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.
Pritam Kumar Dubey – Appellant
Versus
State Of Uttar Pradesh, Through Principal Secretary, Home Department, Lucknow. And Another – Respondent
APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1351 of 2025
Decided on : 24-01-2025
(A) Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 – Sections 138 and 143 – Expeditious trial – Directions issued by the Apex Court for speedy disposal of cases under Section 138 – Courts must follow prescribed procedures to ensure timely resolution of complaints – The concerned court is directed to conclude the trial within six months, adhering to statutory provisions. (Paras 4, 6, 7)
(B) Judicial efficiency – The court emphasized the need for pragmatic approaches in handling summons and trials under the N.I. Act, including the use of affidavits and ensuring the presence of accused. (Paras 4, 8)
Facts of the case: The applicant filed a complaint under Section 138 of the N.I. Act in 2022, but the trial has not concluded, prompting the request for expedited proceedings.
Findings of Court: The court directed the concerned magistrate to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within six months, in accordance with the statutory provisions.
Issues: The main issue was the delay in the trial of the complaint under Section 138 of the N.I. Act and the need for expeditious resolution.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reiterated the importance of adhering to the Apex Court's directions for timely disposal of cases under the N.I. Act, emphasizing the necessity of avoiding unnecessary technicalities.
Result: Application disposed of with directions.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. contestation for expedited trial (Para 2) |
| 2. need for expeditious disposal (Para 4 , 5) |
1. Heard Sri Man Mohan Mishra, Advocate along with Shri Kartikey Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri P. P.Tiwari, learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The present application has been filed to direct the Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) II, Court No. 15, Bhadohi to decide the proceeding in the Complaint Case No. 10020/2022 (Pritam Kumar Dubey Vs. Anil Kumar), under Section 138 N.I. Act, P.S.Aurai, District- Bhadohi, within a stipulated period.
3. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that though this complaint under N.I. Act was filed in the year 2022, but the trial could not yet be concluded. It is further submitted that as per Section 143(2) of N.I. Act, the trial for the offence under N.I. Act should be conducted on day to day basis and it is further provided u/s 143(3) that the trial should be concluded within six months from the date of filing of the complaint.
4. The Apex Court in the case of Indian Bank Association and others vs. Union of India and others; (2014) 5 SCC 590, has issued direction for expeditious disposal of the cases under N.I. Act. Paragraph Nos. 22, 23 and 24 of the aforesaid judgement are being quoted as under:
"22. We notice, considering all those aspects, few High Courts of the country have laid down certain procedures for speedy disposal of cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Reference, in this connection, may be made to the judgments of the Bombay High Court in KSL and Industries Ltd. v. Mannalal Khandelwal, Indo International Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra (2005) 44 Civil CC and Harischandra Biyani v. Stock Holding Corpn. of India Ltd. (2006) 4 MhLJ 381, the judgment of the Calcutta High Court in Magma Leasing Ltd. v. State of West Bengal and others (2007) 3 CHN 574 and the judgment of the Delhi High Court in Rajesh Agarwal v. State and another (2010) ILR 6 Delhi 610. Directions
23. Many of the directions given by the various High Courts, in our view, are worthy of emulation by the Criminal Courts all over the country dealing with cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, for which the following directions are being given :-
23.1. The Metropolitan Magistrate/Judicial Magistrate (MM/JM), on the day when the complaint under Section 138 of the Act is presented, shall scrutinize the complaint and, if the complaint is accompanied by the affidavit, and the affidavit and the documents, if any, are found to be in order, take cognizance and direct issuance of summons.
23.2. The MM/JM should adopt a pragmatic and realistic approach while issuing summons. Summons must be properly addressed and sent by post as well as by e-mail address got from the complainant. The court, in appropriate cases, may take the assistance of the police or the nearby court to serve notice to the accused. For notice of appearance, a short date be fixed.
If the summons is received back unserved, immediate follow-up action be taken.
23.3. The court may indicate in the summon that if the accused makes an application for compounding of offences at the first hearing of the case and, if such an application is made, the court may pass appropriate orders at the earliest.
23.4. The court should direct the accused, when he appears to furnish a bail bond, to ensure his appearance during trial and ask him to take notice under Section 251 Cr.P.C. to enable him to enter his plea of defence and fix the case for defence evidence, unless an application is made by the accused under Section 145(2) for recalling a witness for cross-examination.
23.5. The court concerned must ensure that examination-in-chief, cross-examination and re- examination of the complainant must be conducted within three months of assigning the case. The court has option of accepting affidavits of the witnesses, instead of examining them in the court. The witnesses to the complaint and accused must be available for cros
The court emphasized the necessity for expeditious trials under the Negotiable Instruments Act, mandating adherence to specific procedures to ensure timely resolution of complaints.
The court mandates expeditious disposal of trials under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, emphasizing adherence to statutory timelines and proper procedures.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for expeditious disposal of cases under the N.I. Act, as emphasized by the directions issued by the Apex Court and the statutory provision....
Dishonour of cheque – All proceedings under N.I. Act should be concluded expeditiously without going into unnecessary technicality.
The court mandated that trials under Section 138 of the N.I. Act must be concluded expeditiously, ideally within six months, following the Apex Court's guidelines.
The court established that trials under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act must be conducted expeditiously, in line with statutory requirements and Supreme Court directives.
The court emphasized the necessity for expeditious trials under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, mandating completion within six months as per statutory provisions.
The court mandated the expeditious trial of complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, emphasizing adherence to statutory timelines and procedures for timely justice.
The court mandated the expeditious conclusion of trials under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, emphasizing adherence to statutory timelines and procedures.
The central legal point established is the obligation of the courts to expedite the proceedings of cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, in line with the directions of the ....
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.