O R D E R

The petitioner is the accused in S.T.No.430 of 2023 on the file of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-I, Ernakulam. The complaint is filed by the 1^st respondent against the petitioner for allegedly committing the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (‘N. I Act’, in short).

2. During the pendency of the proceeding, the 1^st respondent filed Annexure A4 application under Section 143A of the N.I.Act for interim compensation. Even though the petitioner filed Annexure A5 objection to the application, by the impugned Annexure A6 order, the Trial Court allowed Annexure A4 application. Annexure A6 order is illegal, irrational and irregular. Hence, the criminal miscellaneous case.

3. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

4. The learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that the Trial Court has passed Annexure A6 order without any application of mind and without considering the parameters laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rakesh Ranjan Shrivastava v. State of Jharkhand and others [ (2024) 4 SCC 419 ]. The impugned order is erroneous and liable to be set aside.

5. I