Section 143A of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is prospective in nature and cannot be applied to criminal complaints filed before the date of its enforcement, i.e., 01.09.2018, as it creates a new substantive liability upon an accused before conviction.

Order

23/03/2026

1. By way of filing the present petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned order dated 15.03.2019, passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bayana, Bharatpur in criminal complaint case No. 920/2017, by which a direction has been issued to the accused-petitioner to deposit 20% of the cheque amount with the complainant-respondent as interim compensation in terms of Section 143A of the Negotiable Instrument Act within a period of 60 days.

2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the complainant respondent has filed a complaint against the accused petitioner under Section 138 of the N.I. Act on 24.03.2017 wherein cognizance has been taken against the accused petitioner on 16.11.2017 and thereafter, an application was submitted by the complainant-respondent under Section 143A of the N.I Act seeking direction to the accused petitioner to deposit 20% of the amount of the cheque in terms of Section 143A of the N.I. Act. Counsel submits that amendment under Section 143-A of the N.I. Act came into force w.e.f. 01.09.2018. The aforesaid amendment cannot be applied with retrospective effect and can only be applied with prospective effect. Hence under these circumstances, such direction could not have been issued by the Trial Court against the accused petitioner, and therefore, interference of this Court is warranted.

3. Per contra, learned counsel for the complainant-respondent opposes the arguments raised by counsel for the accused petitioner and submits that the amendment would have retrospective effect since it is a beneficial legislation, that has been introduced by the legislature. Hence under these circumstances, the Court below has not committed any error in passing the impugned order issuing direction to the accused petitioner to deposit 20% of the cheque amount as interim compensation in favour of the complainant respondent. Hence, interference of this Court is not warranted and the present petition is liable to be rejected.

4. Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on record.

5. This fact is not in dispute that a complaint was submitted by the complainant-respondent against the accused petitioner on 24.03.2017 wherein cognizance has been taken against the petitioner on 16.11.2017. This fact is not in dispute that at the time of commission of the alleged offence or at the time of filing of the complaint, there was no provision for payment of any interim compensation to the complainant under the N.I. by the accused during pendency of the trial.

6. The Legislature brought and introduced a new provision for payment of interim compensation by the accused to the complainant by in the form of Section 143A of the Act of 1881 and the new amended provision came into force with effect from 01.09.2018. The new Section 143A of the Act of 1881 reads as under:-

“ Section 143A : Power to direct interim compensation

(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the Court trying an offence under section 138 may order the drawer of the cheque to pay interim compensation to the complainant—

(a) in a summary trial or a summons case, where he pleads not guilty to the accusation