V. Narasingh, J.

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the Opposite Parties.

1. The present criminal revision has been filed assailing the order dated 12.01.2026 passed in I.C.C. Case No.7 of 2025 by the J.M.F.C., Jajpur Road, whereby the prayer of the accused-Petitioner to consider the ground of maintainability of the proceeding under Section 138¹138. Dishonour of cheque for insufficiency, etc., of funds in the account.—Where any cheque drawn by a person on an account maintained by him with a banker for payment of any amount of money to another person from out of that account for the discharge, in whole or in part, of any debt or other liability, is returned by the bank unpaid, either because of the amount of money standing to the credit of that account is insufficient to honour the cheque or that it exceeds the amount arranged to be paid from that account by an agreement made with that bank, such person shall be deemed to have committed an offence and shall, without prejudice to any other provision of this Act, be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine which may extend to twice the amount of the cheque, or with both: Provided that nothing contained in this section shall apply unless— (a) the cheque has been presented to the bank within a period of six months from the date on which it is drawn or within the period of its validity, whichever is earlier; (b) the payee or the holder in due course of the cheque, as the case may be, makes a demand for the payment of the said amount of money by giving a notice in writing, to the drawer of the cheque, within thirty days of the receipt of information by him from the bank regarding the return of the cheque as unpaid; and (c) the drawer of such cheque fails to make the payment of the said amount of money to the payee or as the case may be, to the holder in due course of the cheque within fifteen days of the receipt of the said notice. of the N.I. Act in terms of the direction of this Court dated 02.12.2025 in CRLMC No.5041 of 2025 was negatived.

The relevant portion of the impugned order is culled out hereunder;

“xxx xxx xxx

………..Now, the case/record is at the stage of recording of the accused’s statement. The accused has enough opportunity to advance his defence, if any, at the right stage. So, being guided by the provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act and the facts and circumstances of this case, I am of the opinion that, at this stage, the petition is not maintainable…

xxx xxx xxx”

2. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the Petitioner that instead of considering the question of maintainability in terms of the order passed by this Court, referred to hereinabove, the Trial Court has held the petition filed as not maintainable.

3. Learned counsel for the complainant-Opposite Party No.2 submits that there is no illegality in the order passed in as much as, by the impugned order, liberty has been granted to the accused to canvass his defence during recording of his statement.

4. Brief facts germane for just adjudication runs thus;

The Opposite Party No.2, as complainant, instituted I.C.C. Case No.7 of 2025 in the Court of the J.M.F.C., Jajpur Road, Jajpur, citing the present Petitioner as the accused under Section 138¹138. Dishonour of cheque for insufficiency, etc., of funds in the account.—Where any cheque drawn by a person on an account maintained by him with a banker for payment of any amount of money to another person from out of that account for the discharge, in whole or in part, of any debt or other liability, is returned by the bank unpaid, either because of the amount of money standing to the credit of that account is insufficient to honour the cheque or that it exceeds the amount arranged to be paid from that account by an agreement made with that bank, such person shall be deemed to have committed an offence and shall, without prejudice to any other provision of th