Vinod Chand v. Rajesh Pratap Singh under Section

6. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the order dated 7.7.2025 passed in Criminal Complaint No: 6796 of 2020 by the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, (third) Gorakhpur according interim compensation under Section 143A of the N.I. Act to the tune of 20% out of the amount of Rs.9,00,000/- cannot be sustained for a single moment particularly in view of the fact that it is not in conformity and in consonance with the guide lines laid down by the the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rakesh Ranjan Srivastava vs. State of Jharkhand 2024 INSC 205. Further submission is that the criteria as the yardsticks in order to determine as to whether the complainant is entitled to interim compensation has not been adhered to.

7. Learned AGA on the other hand submits that once the cheques stood drawn then the presumption under Section 139 of the N.I.Act, however, he could not dispute the fact that the law in this regard is crystalized in Rakesh Ranjan Srivastava (Supra). He further submits that the order be set aside, matter be remitted back to the court below to pass a fresh order.

8. I have heard the submissions so made across the bar and perused the record carefully. The order dated 7.7.2025 according interim compensation is quoted herein under:- “ददिनननांक : 07.07.2025 पतनवलली आदिदेशनरर पदेश हहई। पतनवलली वनस्तदे दनस्तनरण पनररनन पत अन्तररत धनरन 143A परकनम्य ललखत अलधदनयम ददिनननांदकत 20.03.2024 दनयत हहै। उक्त पनररनन पत पर पररवनदिली कदे दवदनन अलधवक्तन कको पपूवर दनयत दतलर पर ससुनन जन चसुकन हहै। पनररनन पत ददिनननांदकत 20.03.2024 अन्तररत धनरन 143ए परकनम्य ललखत अलधदनयम, पररवनदिली दबिनकोदि कसुमनर चन्दि दनरन इस आशय पस्तसुत कर करन दकयन रयन हहै दक अदभियसुक्त रनजदेश पतनप लसनांह दनरन पररवनदिली दबिनकोदि कसुमनर चन्दि कको चदेक सनां० 262262 ददिनननांदकत 20.03.2020 मसु०-9,00,000/- रुपयदे भिनरतलीय स्टदेट बिबक शनखन लनांकन, वनरनणसली कन ददियन रयन लजसदे पररवनदिली दनरन अपनदे खनतन मम जमन दकयन रयन तको उक्त चदेक अपयनरप्त धनरनदश हकोनदे कदे कनरण अननदिररत हको रयन। पररवनदिली नदे अपनदे अलधवक्तन कदे मनध्यम सदे दवपकली कको नकोदटस ददिनननांदकत 24.06.2020 व 25.06.2020 कको जररयदे रलजस्टटली भिदेजवनयन। ददिनननांक 01.05.2023 कको ददियदे रयदे बियनन मसुललजम मम भिली पररवनदि-पत मम कहदे बिनतत सदे इन्कनर दकयन। पररवनदिली कको अपनदे दिवन ईलनज मम ललयदे रयदे कजर कको वनपस करनदे तरन अन्य दिवन ईलनज कदे ललयदे पहैसदे ककी सख्त आवश्यकतन हहै। अततः पररवनदिली दनरन यनचनन ककी रयली हहै दक धनरन 143ए परकनम्य ललखत अलधदनयम कदे अनांतररत पररवनदिली कको अदभियसुक्त सदे अनांतररम पदतकर ददिलनयन जनयदे। पनररनन पत कदे दवरुद्ध अदभियसुक्त रनजदेश पतनप लसनांह दनरन आपलत्ति ददिननदकत 18.10.2024 दिनलखल ककी रयली। उक्त आपलत्ति मम अदभियसुक्त दनरन यह करन दकयन रयन हहै दक उपरकोक्त पररवनदि मम अदभियसुक्त कन बियनन मसुललजम अनांदकत दकयन जन चसुकन हहै। अदभियसुक्त दनरन पररवनदि -पत कदे करनत सदे इन्कनर दकयन रयन हहै। पररवनदिली दनरन अदभियसुक्त कदे फ्लहैट कको खरलीदिनदे कदे ललयदे पबतनललीस लनख रुपयदे नकदि दिदेनदे कहन रयन हहै जबिदक उक्त लदेन -दिदेन ककी पररवनदिली दनरन ककोई ललखन-पढली हकोनन नहहीं बितनयन रयन हहै। अततः पररवनदिली दनरन पस्तसुत उक्त पनररनन-पत ददिनननांदकत 2003 2024 कको दनरस्त दकयदे जननदे ककी यनचनन ककी रयली हहै। पतनवलली कदे अवलकोकन सदे यह स्पष्ट हकोतन हहै दक पररवनदिली दबिनकोदि कसुमनर चन्दि दनरन पनररनन पत ददिनननांदकत 20.03.2024 अननदिररत चदेक सनां० 262262 ददिनननांदकत 20.03.2020 धनरनदश 9,00,000/- रुपयदे जको अदभियसुक्त कदे बिबक खनतन भिनरतलीय स्टदेट बिबक शनखन लनांकन , वनरनणसली मम हहै, कदे बिनवत 20 पदतशत धनरनदश अनांतररम पदतकर कदे रूप मम पररवनदिली कको अदभियसुक्त सदे ददिलनयदे जननदे हदेतसु पस्तसुत दकयन रयन हहै। उक्त पनररनन पत व अदभियसुक्त ककी आपलत्ति ददिनननांदकत 18.10.2024 कदे आलकोक मम परकनम्यदे ललखत अलधदनयम, 1881 ककी धनरन 143ए कन अवलकोकन दकयन। उक्त पनवधनन यह वदणरत करतली हहै दक "143A (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 tothe accusation made in the complaint; and (b) in any other case, upon framing of charge. (2) The interim compensation under sub-section (1) shall not exceed twenty percent of the amount of the cheque. (3) The interim compensation shall be paid within sixty days from the date of the order under sub-section (1) or within such further period not exceeding thirty days as may be directed by the Court on sufficient cause being shown by the drawer of the cheque." अततः उपरकोक्त वदणरत पनवधनन कदे अवलकोकन सदे यह स्पष्ट हहै दक चदेक बिनउनांस सदे सनांबिनांलधत मसुकदिमदे मम यददि वनदि कदे दवचनरण कदे दिदौरनन अपनन जसुमर स्वलीकनर नहहीं दकयन जनतन एवनां वनदि कनांटदेस्ट दकयन जनतन हहै तको उक्त पररलस्रदत मम न्यनयनलय पररवनदिली कको अन्तररम मसुआवजदे कदे रूप मम अननदिररत चदेक मम वदणरत धनरनदश कदे 20 पदतशत धनरनदश कदे समनन रनदश अदभियसुक्त सदे ददिलनयदे जननदे कदे बिनवत आदिदेश पनररत कर सकतन हहै। उपरकोक्त वदणरत पनवधनन कदे आलकोक मम मनननलीय सवर्वोच्च न्यनयनलय दनरन पनररत दवलध व्यवस्रन G.J. RAJA VS TEJRAJ SURANA (CRIMIN ALAPPEAL NO. 1160 OF 2019) मम पनररत दवलध व्यवस्रन कन ससम्मनन अवलकोकन दकयन रयन। उक्त दवलध व्यवस्रन मम भिली मनननलीय सवर्वोच्च न्यनयनलय दनरन यह अवधनररत दकयन रयन हहै दक "18. The provisions contained in Section 143A have two dimensions. First, the Section creates a liability in that an accused can be ordered to pay over upto 20% of the cheque amount to the complainant. Such an order can be passed while the complaint is not yet adjudicated upon and the guilt of the accused has not yet been determined. Secondly, it makes available the machinery for recovery, as if the interim compensation were arrears of land revenue. Thus, it not only creates a new disability or an obligation but also exposes the accused to coercive methods of recovery of such interim compensation through the machinery of the State as if the interim compensation represented arrears of land revenue." अततः उपरकोक्त वदणरत पनवधनन व दवलध व्यवस्रन कदे आलकोक मम न्यनयनलय कदे मत मम पररवनदिली दबिनकोदि कसुमनर चन्दि अदभियसुक्त रनजदेश पतनप लसनांह सदे उक्त अननदिररत चदेक कदे बिनवत 20 पदतशत धनरनदश बितदौर अन्तररम मसुआवजन पननदे कन आधकनरली हहै। अततः पनररनन पत ददिनननांदकत 20.03.2024 स्वलीकनर दकयदे जननदे यकोग्य हहै। आदिदेश पररवनदिली दबिनकोदि कसुमनर चन्दि कन पनररनन-पत अनांतररत धनरन 143ए ददिननदकत 20.03.2024 स्वलीकनर दकयन जनतन हहै। अदभियसुक्त रनजदेश पतनप लसनांह कको आदिदेदशत दकयन जनतन हहै दक वह अननदिररत चदेक सनां०- 262262 ददिनननांदकत 20.03.2020 मसु०- 9,00,000/- रुपयदे ककी 20 पदतशत धनरनदश पररवनदिली कको बितदौर अन्तररम मसुआवजन अन्दिर 15 ददिवस मम अदिन करदे। वनदि कदे दनस्तनरण कदे उपरनन्त पककनर मसुकदिमन धनरन 143ए परकनम्य लललखत अलधदनयम ककी उपधनरन 4 तन 6 कदे तहत कनयरवनहली करनदे हदेतसु स्वतन्त हतरदे। पतनवलली वनस्तदे सनक्ष्य पररवनदिली ददिनननांक 28.08.2025 कको पदेश हको।"

9. The Court finds that there has been complete non-adherence of the mandate of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rakesh Ranjan Srivastava (supra), whereby the Hon'ble Apex Court has clearly observed in para-19 as under:- "19. Subject to what is held earlier, the main conclusions can be summarised as follows: a. The exercise of power under sub-section (1) of Section 143A is discretionary. The provision is directory and not mandatory. The word "may" used in the provision cannot be construed as "shall". b. While deciding the prayer made under Section 143A, the Court must record brief reasons indicating consideration of all relevant factors. c. The broad parameters for exercising the discretion under Section 143A are as follows: i. The Court will have to prima facie evaluate the merits of the case made out by the complainant and the merits of the defence pleaded by the accused in the reply to the application. The financial distress of the accused can also be a consideration. ii. A direction to pay interim compensation can be issued, only if the complainant makes out a prima facie case. iii. If the defence of the accused is found to be prima facie plausible, the Court may exercise discretion in refusing to grant interim compensation. iv. If the Court concludes that a case is made out to grant interim compensation, it will also have to apply its mind to the quantum of interim compensation to be granted. While doing so, the Court will have to consider several factors such as the nature of the transaction, the relationship, if any, between the accused and the complainant, etc. v. There could be several other relevant factors in the peculiar facts of a given case, which cannot be exhaustively stated. The parameters stated above are not exhaustive."

10. In the present case in hand, the Court finds that there has been no consideration of the parameter pertaining to the financial distress of the accused which is one of the consideration when a decision is to be taken for payment of interim compensation post evaluation on the merits on prima facie basis of the case of the complainant and the accused. The quantum of compensation has also not been taken note of and further the Court finds that there is no consideration with regard to the several factors such as nature of the transaction relationship between the accused and the complainant. Since the said exercise is completely lacking, thus this Court has no option but to set aside the order dated 7.7.2025 according to interim compensation to the opposite party no.2.

11. Accordingly, the present application stands disposed of.

12. The order dated 7.7.2025 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, (third) Gorakhpur to the Criminal Complaint No: 6796 of 2020, Vinod Chand vs Rajesh Pratap Singh is set aside.

13. The matter is remitted to back to the court below to pass fresh order with most expedition.

14. In order to facilitate expeditious disposal of the matter, the applicant is to furnish the certified copy of the order by 29.08.2025.

15. The court below post remand shall pass a fresh order strictly in accordance with law principle laid down in the case of Rakesh Ranjan Srivastava (supra).

16. The applicant is represented before this Court through his counsel, thus, the applicant shall not take any adjournment, in case, adjournment is being granted for any eventuality then the same should be on the genuine reasons and not more than ten days at a stretch. Order Date :- 23.8.2025 N.S.Rathour (Vikas Budhwar, J)

6. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the order dated 7.7.2025 passed in Criminal Complaint No: 6796 of 2020 by the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, (third) Gorakhpur according interim compensation under Section 143A of the N.I. Act to the tune of 20% out of the amount of Rs.9,00,000/- cannot be sustained for a single moment particularly in view of the fact that it is not in conformity and in consonance with the guide lines laid down by the the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rakesh Ranjan Srivastava vs. State of Jharkhand 2024 INSC 205. Further submission is that the criteria as the yardsticks in order to determine as to whether the complainant is entitled to interim compensation has not been adhered to.

7. Learned AGA on the other hand submits that once the cheques stood drawn then the presumption under Section 139 of the N.I.Act, however, he could not dispute the fact that the law in this regard is crystalized in Rakesh Ranjan Srivastava (Supra). He further submits that the order be set aside, matter be remitted back to the court below to pass a fresh order.

8. I have heard the submissions so made across the bar and perused the record carefully. The order dated 7.7.2025 according interim compensation is quoted herein under:- “ददिनननांक : 07.07.2025 पतनवलली आदिदेशनरर पदेश हहई। पतनवलली वनस्तदे दनस्तनरण पनररनन पत अन्तररत धनरन 143A परकनम्य ललखत अलधदनयम ददिनननांदकत 20.03.2024 दनयत हहै। उक्त पनररनन पत पर पररवनदिली कदे दवदनन अलधवक्तन कको पपूवर दनयत दतलर पर ससुनन जन चसुकन हहै। पनररनन पत ददिनननांदकत 20.03.2024 अन्तररत धनरन 143ए परकनम्य ललखत अलधदनयम, पररवनदिली दबिनकोदि कसुमनर चन्दि दनरन इस आशय पस्तसुत कर करन दकयन रयन हहै दक अदभियसुक्त रनजदेश पतनप लसनांह दनरन पररवनदिली दबिनकोदि कसुमनर चन्दि कको चदेक सनां० 262262 ददिनननांदकत 20.03.2020 मसु०-9,00,000/- रुपयदे भिनरतलीय स्टदेट बिबक शनखन लनांकन, वनरनणसली कन ददियन रयन लजसदे पररवनदिली दनरन अपनदे खनतन मम जमन दकयन रयन तको उक्त चदेक अपयनरप्त धनरनदश हकोनदे कदे कनरण अननदिररत हको रयन। पररवनदिली नदे अपनदे अलधवक्तन कदे मनध्यम सदे दवपकली कको नकोदटस ददिनननांदकत 24.06.2020 व 25.06.2020 कको जररयदे रलजस्टटली भिदेजवनयन। ददिनननांक 01.05.2023 कको ददियदे रयदे बियनन मसुललजम मम भिली पररवनदि-पत मम कहदे बिनतत सदे इन्कनर दकयन। पररवनदिली कको अपनदे दिवन ईलनज मम ललयदे रयदे कजर कको वनपस करनदे तरन अन्य दिवन ईलनज कदे ललयदे पहैसदे ककी सख्त आवश्यकतन हहै। अततः पररवनदिली दनरन यनचनन ककी रयली हहै दक धनरन 143ए परकनम्य ललखत अलधदनयम कदे अनांतररत पररवनदिली कको अदभियसुक्त सदे अनांतररम पदतकर ददिलनयन जनयदे। पनररनन पत कदे दवरुद्ध अदभियसुक्त रनजदेश पतनप लसनांह दनरन आपलत्ति ददिननदकत 18.10.2024 दिनलखल ककी रयली। उक्त आपलत्ति मम अदभियसुक्त दनरन यह करन दकयन रयन हहै दक उपरकोक्त पररवनदि मम अदभियसुक्त कन बियनन मसुललजम अनांदकत दकयन जन चसुकन हहै। अदभियसुक्त दनरन पररवनदि -पत कदे करनत सदे इन्कनर दकयन रयन हहै। पररवनदिली दनरन अदभियसुक्त कदे फ्लहैट कको खरलीदिनदे कदे ललयदे पबतनललीस लनख रुपयदे नकदि दिदेनदे कहन रयन हहै जबिदक उक्त लदेन -दिदेन ककी पररवनदिली दनरन ककोई ललखन-पढली हकोनन नहहीं बितनयन रयन हहै। अततः पररवनदिली दनरन पस्तसुत उक्त पनररनन-पत ददिनननांदकत 2003 2024 कको दनरस्त दकयदे जननदे ककी यनचनन ककी रयली हहै। पतनवलली कदे अवलकोकन सदे यह स्पष्ट हकोतन हहै दक पररवनदिली दबिनकोदि कसुमनर चन्दि दनरन पनररनन पत ददिनननांदकत 20.03.2024 अननदिररत चदेक सनां० 262262 ददिनननांदकत 20.03.2020 धनरनदश 9,00,000/- रुपयदे जको अदभियसुक्त कदे बिबक खनतन भिनरतलीय स्टदेट बिबक शनखन लनांकन , वनरनणसली मम हहै, कदे बिनवत 20 पदतशत धनरनदश अनांतररम पदतकर कदे रूप मम पररवनदिली कको अदभियसुक्त सदे ददिलनयदे जननदे हदेतसु पस्तसुत दकयन रयन हहै। उक्त पनररनन पत व अदभियसुक्त ककी आपलत्ति ददिनननांदकत 18.10.2024 कदे आलकोक मम परकनम्यदे ललखत अलधदनयम, 1881 ककी धनरन 143ए कन अवलकोकन दकयन। उक्त पनवधनन यह वदणरत करतली हहै दक "143A (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 tothe accusation made in the complaint; and (b) in any other case, upon framing of charge. (2) The interim compensation under sub-section (1) shall not exceed twenty percent of the amount of the cheque. (3) The interim compensation shall be paid within sixty days from the date of the order under sub-section (1) or within such further period not exceeding thirty days as may be directed by the Court on sufficient cause being shown by the drawer of the cheque." अततः उपरकोक्त वदणरत पनवधनन कदे अवलकोकन सदे यह स्पष्ट हहै दक चदेक बिनउनांस सदे सनांबिनांलधत मसुकदिमदे मम यददि वनदि कदे दवचनरण कदे दिदौरनन अपनन जसुमर स्वलीकनर नहहीं दकयन जनतन एवनां वनदि कनांटदेस्ट दकयन जनतन हहै तको उक्त पररलस्रदत मम न्यनयनलय पररवनदिली कको अन्तररम मसुआवजदे कदे रूप मम अननदिररत चदेक मम वदणरत धनरनदश कदे 20 पदतशत धनरनदश कदे समनन रनदश अदभियसुक्त सदे ददिलनयदे जननदे कदे बिनवत आदिदेश पनररत कर सकतन हहै। उपरकोक्त वदणरत पनवधनन कदे आलकोक मम मनननलीय सवर्वोच्च न्यनयनलय दनरन पनररत दवलध व्यवस्रन G.J. RAJA VS TEJRAJ SURANA (CRIMIN ALAPPEAL NO. 1160 OF 2019) मम पनररत दवलध व्यवस्रन कन ससम्मनन अवलकोकन दकयन रयन। उक्त दवलध व्यवस्रन मम भिली मनननलीय सवर्वोच्च न्यनयनलय दनरन यह अवधनररत दकयन रयन हहै दक "18. The provisions contained in Section 143A have two dimensions. First, the Section creates a liability in that an accused can be ordered to pay over upto 20% of the cheque amount to the complainant. Such an order can be passed while the complaint is not yet adjudicated upon and the guilt of the accused has not yet been determined. Secondly, it makes available the machinery for recovery, as if the interim compensation were arrears of land revenue. Thus, it not only creates a new disability or an obligation but also exposes the accused to coercive methods of recovery of such interim compensation through the machinery of the State as if the interim compensation represented arrears of land revenue." अततः उपरकोक्त वदणरत पनवधनन व दवलध व्यवस्रन कदे आलकोक मम न्यनयनलय कदे मत मम पररवनदिली दबिनकोदि कसुमनर चन्दि अदभियसुक्त रनजदेश पतनप लसनांह सदे उक्त अननदिररत चदेक कदे बिनवत 20 पदतशत धनरनदश बितदौर अन्तररम मसुआवजन पननदे कन आधकनरली हहै। अततः पनररनन पत ददिनननांदकत 20.03.2024 स्वलीकनर दकयदे जननदे यकोग्य हहै। आदिदेश पररवनदिली दबिनकोदि कसुमनर चन्दि कन पनररनन-पत अनांतररत धनरन 143ए ददिननदकत 20.03.2024 स्वलीकनर दकयन जनतन हहै। अदभियसुक्त रनजदेश पतनप लसनांह कको आदिदेदशत दकयन जनतन हहै दक वह अननदिररत चदेक सनां०- 262262 ददिनननांदकत 20.03.2020 मसु०- 9,00,000/- रुपयदे ककी 20 पदतशत धनरनदश पररवनदिली कको बितदौर अन्तररम मसुआवजन अन्दिर 15 ददिवस मम अदिन करदे। वनदि कदे दनस्तनरण कदे उपरनन्त पककनर मसुकदिमन धनरन 143ए परकनम्य लललखत अलधदनयम ककी उपधनरन 4 तन 6 कदे तहत कनयरवनहली करनदे हदेतसु स्वतन्त हतरदे। पतनवलली वनस्तदे सनक्ष्य पररवनदिली ददिनननांक 28.08.2025 कको पदेश हको।"

9. The Court finds that there has been complete non-adherence of the mandate of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rakesh Ranjan Srivastava (supra), whereby the Hon'ble Apex Court has clearly observed in para-19 as under:- "19. Subject to what is held earlier, the main conclusions can be summarised as follows: a. The exercise of power under sub-section (1) of Section 143A is discretionary. The provision is directory and not mandatory. The word "may" used in the provision cannot be construed as "shall". b. While deciding the prayer made under Section 143A, the Court must record brief reasons indicating consideration of all relevant factors. c. The broad parameters for exercising the discretion under Section 143A are as follows: i. The Court will have to prima facie evaluate the merits of the case made out by the complainant and the merits of the defence pleaded by the accused in the reply to the application. The financial distress of the accused can also be a consideration. ii. A direction to pay interim compensation can be issued, only if the complainant makes out a prima facie case. iii. If the defence of the accused is found to be prima facie plausible, the Court may exercise discretion in refusing to grant interim compensation. iv. If the Court concludes that a case is made out to grant interim compensation, it will also have to apply its mind to the quantum of interim compensation to be granted. While doing so, the Court will have to consider several factors such as the nature of the transaction, the relationship, if any, between the accused and the complainant, etc. v. There could be several other relevant factors in the peculiar facts of a given case, which cannot be exhaustively stated. The parameters stated above are not exhaustive."

10. In the present case in hand, the Court finds that there has been no consideration of the parameter pertaining to the financial distress of the accused which is one of the consideration when a decision is to be taken for payment of interim compensation post evaluation on the merits on prima facie basis of the case of the complainant and the accused. The quantum of compensation has also not been taken note of and further the Court finds that there is no consideration with regard to the several factors such as nature of the transaction relationship between the accused and the complainant. Since the said exercise is completely lacking, thus this Court has no option but to set aside the order dated 7.7.2025 according to interim compensation to the opposite party no.2.

11. Accordingly, the present application stands disposed of.

12. The order dated 7.7.2025 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, (third) Gorakhpur to the Criminal Complaint No: 6796 of 2020, Vinod Chand vs Rajesh Pratap Singh is set aside.

13. The matter is remitted to back to the court below to pass fresh order with most expedition.

14. In order to facilitate expeditious disposal of the matter, the applicant is to furnish the certified copy of the order by 29.08.2025.

15. The court below post remand shall pass a fresh order strictly in accordance with law principle laid down in the case of Rakesh Ranjan Srivastava (supra).

16. The applicant is represented before this Court through his counsel, thus, the applicant shall not take any adjournment, in case, adjournment is being granted for any eventuality then the same should be on the genuine reasons and not more than ten days at a stretch. Order Date :- 23.8.2025 N.S.Rathour (Vikas Budhwar, J)