Atul Sharma v. Sukhveer Singh) u
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:146158 Court No. - 75 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 14954 of 2025 Applicant :- Sukhvir Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilendra Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Komal Prasad Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.
Legal Reasoning
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." 13. As the criteria earmarked by the Hon'ble Apex Court has not been adhered to regarding prima facie evaluabtion of the case set out by the complainant and the accused financial distress of the accused quantum and also the issue relatable to determination of the compensation while applying the principles to the nature of transaction of the parties. Since the aforesaid exercise is completely lacking thus the order cannot be sustained. Accordingly the application is decided in the following terms: A. The order dated 30.1.2025 passed in Complaint Case No.3492 of 2023 (Atul Sharma Vs. Sukhveer Singh) u/s 138 of N.I. Act, Police Station South, District Firozabad is set aside. B. The matter stands remitted back to the court below to pass a fresh order strictly in accordance with law. C. For early disposal the applicant to submit a certified copy of the order by 3.9.2025. 14. Sri Saurabh Kumar Pandey, Advocate (A/S 0683/15) holding brief of Sri Akhilendra Yadav, learned counsel for applicant as per the instructions from the applicant has made a statement at bar that their client shall not take any unnecessary adjournment and so much so a similar statement has been made by the learned counsel for opposite party no.2 15. In the light of the aforesaid factual backdrop it is required that the court below shall decide the proceedings strictly in accordance with law as per the mandate contained under sub-section (3) of Section 143 of N.I. Act without granting any unnecessary adjournments and in case adjournments are granted that too should be on extreme circumstances not beyond seven days at a stretch.
Arguments
1. Heard Sri Saurabh Kumar Pandey, Advocate (A/S 0683/15) holding brief of Sri Akhilendra Yadav, learned counsel for applicant and Sri S.K. Singh, learned AGA for the State as well as Sri S.K. Shukla, Advocate (A/S-0416/2012) Advocate holding brief of Sri Komal Prasad, learned counsel for opposite party No.2. 2. A joint statement has been made by the learned counsel for the parties that they do not propose to file any affidavit and the application be decided on the basis documents available on record. With the consent of the parties the application is being decided at the fresh stage. 3. This application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed by the applicant to quash the order dated 30.01.2025 passed in Complaint Case No.3492 of 2023 (Atul Sharma Vs. Sukhveer Singh) u/s 138 of N.I. Act, Police Station South, District Firozabad, pending in the court of Additional Civil Judge(J.D.)/Magistrate Shikohabad, Firozabad. 4. The case of the applicant is that the opposite party no.2 lodged a complaint on 8.2.2023 under Section 138 of N.I. Act against the applicant with the allegation that the allegation in order to discharge his liability had drawn five cheques of rupees ten lakhs each bearing cheque No.537307 dated 15.12.2022, cheque No.537309 dated 15.12.2022, cheque No.537310 dated 15.12.2022, cheque No.537311 dated 15.12.2022 and cheque No.537312 dated 15.12.2022 which on presentation in the bank came to be dishonoured followed by statutory demand notice and a complaint. Thereafter the applicant came to be summoned. 5. An application came to be filed by opposite party no.2 under Section 143A of the N.I. Act for awarding interim compensation as per the provisions contained under Section 143A of the N.I. Act which was objected by the applicant-accused and the same came to be allowed on 30.1.2025 by the Court of Additional Civil Judge(J.D.)/Magistrate Shikohabad, Firozabad. 6. Questioning the said order the present application has been preferred. 7. Learned counsel for applicant has submitted that the order dated 30.1.2025 passed by the court below awarding interim compensation to the tune of 18% of the total of Rs.50,00,000/- in exercise of Section 143A of N.I. Act cannot be sustained for the simple reason that the same has not been as per mandate of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Rakesh Ranjan Srivastava Vs. State of Jharkhand passed in Crl. Appeal No.741 of 2024 decided on 15.3.2024. Submission is that certain criteria has been earmarked by the Hon'ble Apex Court regarding prima facie evaluation of merits of the case made out by the complainant and merits of the defence pleaded by the accused, financial distress of the accused a prima facie finding regarding granting of interim compensation and in case interim compensation is to be granted then the quantum and also the factors such as nature of transaction relationship of the parties between the accused and complainant. Contention is that none of the said criteria had been followed as merely on asking compensation has been accorded. 8. Learned AGA as well as Sri S.K. Shukla, who appears for the opposite party No.2 submits that once the cheques stood drawn and the same was dishonoured then the presumption under Section 118 read with Section 139 of the N.I. Act would be there, however, he could not dispute the fact that the order in question awarding the interim compensation is not as per the mandate of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Rakesh Ranjan Srivastava (Supra). 9. According to him the order may be set aside the applicant may be directed not to take any necessary adjournment and a time bound direction to be issued for disposal of the proceedings in that regard. Learned AGA has supported the argument of the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2. 10. I have heard these submission so made across the bar and perused the record carefully. 11. The order dated 30.1.2025 awarding interim compensation passed in Complaint Case No.3492 of 2023 (Atul Sharma Vs. Sukhveer Singh) u/s 138 of N.I. Act, Police Station South, District Firozabad, pending in the court of Additional Civil Judge(J.D.)/Magistrate Shikohabad, Firozabad which reads as under:- "ददिननाक 30-01-2025 प्ቔवलली आज आदिदेशनारर हदेततु दनयत हहै। दवगत दतथर कको दनस्तनारण पनाररननाप्ቔ 143 ए दनगकोथसियदेदवल इन्स्टटमदेट एक्ट पर उभय प्ቌ कको सितुनना जना चतुकना हहै। दनस्तनारण पनाररननाप्ቔ 143 ए दनगकोदशएबल इन्स्टटमदे्ሾसि एक्ट पररवनादिली अततुल शमनार ककी ओर सिदे इसि आशय कना पनाररननाप्ቔ पस्ततुत दकयना गयना हहै दक उक धनारना कदे अन्तगरत दवप्ቌली सिदे चहैक मम पदिदशरत धनरनादश मतुव० 50,00,000/-रूपयदे मम सिदे अन्तररम भतुगतनान कदे रूप मम 20 पदतशत भतुगतनान दवप्ቌली सिदे ददिलनायना जनानना न्यनायसिसंगत हहै। अततः पररवनादिली कको दवप्ቌली सिदे चचक मम पदिदशरत धनरनादश मतुव० 50,00,000/-रूपयदे मम सिदे अन्तररम भतुगतनान कदे रूप मम 20 पदतशत भतुगतनान करनायदे जनानदे ककी यनाचनना ककी गयली हहै। दवप्ቌली ककी ओर सिदे उक पनाररननाप्ቔ पर आपथቈኌ करतदे हहए कहना गयना हहै दक पनाररननाप्ቔ पकोषणलीय नहली हहै। उपरकोक पनाररननाप्ቔ दनरस्त दकयदे जनानदे ककी यनाचनना ककी गयली हहै सितुनना तरना प्ቔनावलली कना अवलकोकन दकयना। प्ቔनावलली कदे अवलकोकन सिदे स्प्ቖ हहै दक दवप्ቌली दनारना पररवनादिली कको 50,00,000/- रूपयदे कना चहैक ददियना गयना रना, थजसिदे पररवनादिली नदे अपनदे खनातदे मम जमना दकयना हको उक चचक उसिकदे बचक खनातदे मम अपयनार् धनरनादश हकोनदे कदे कनारण वनाउसंसि हको गयना। उसिकदे बनादि भली दवप्ቌली दनारना पररवनादिली कको ककोई धनरनादश नहीሻ दिली गयली हहै। धनारना 143 ए एन. आई. एक्ट ककी मसंशना कदे अनतुसिनार पररवनादिली कको उक बचक मम दिदशरत धनरनादश मतुव० 50,00,000/-रूपयदे मम सिदे अन्तररम भतुगतनान कदे रूप मम 18 पदतशत भतुगतनान दवप्ቌली सिदे करनायना जनानना न्यनायकोदचत पतलीत हकोतना हहै। आदिदेश दवप्ቌली सितुखवलीर थसिसंह कको आदिदेदशत दकयना जनातना हहै दक पररवनादिली कको चचक मम दिदशरत उधनरनादश भतुव० 50,00,000/-रूपयदे मम सिदे 18 पदतशत भतुगतनान दवप्ቌली एक मनाह कदे अन्दिर करदे। प्ቔनावलली वनास्तदे सितुनवनाई ददिननाक 28-02-2025 कको पदेश हको ददतलीय अपर थसिदवल जज जजू०दडि०/मथज० दशककोहनाबनादि, दफिरकोजनाबनादि।" 12. A bare look of the order in question would reveal that the same is not as per the mandate of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Rakesh Ranjan Srivastava (Supra). The para 19 of the following was observed 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:
Decision
16. With the aforesaid observations, the instant application is disposed of. Order Date :- 23.8.2025 Md Faisal Digitally signed by :- MOHD FAISAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad