Manoj Kumar v. Sarvjeet Kaur, under Section

1. Heard Sri Sushil Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri J.P. Gupta, learned AGA for the State.

2. This application u/s 528 of BNSS has been preferred to quash the impugned order dt. 15.7.2025 passed by learned Civil Judge (J.D.)/Judicial Magistrate, Sambhal at Chandausi in Complaint Case No. 85 of 2021 Manoj Kumar Vs. Sarvjeet Kaur, under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, Police Station Bahjoi, District Sambhal, whereby the learned trial Court has rejected the application of the applicant under Section 143A of Negotiable Instrument Act.

3. The case of the applicant is that a complaint stood lodged by the applicant against the opposite party no. 2 with an allegation that with respect to discharge of a liability the applicant herein had drawn a cheque bearing no. 085856 dated 01.03.2021 of an amount of Rs. 25,00,000/- which on presentation in the bank came to be dishonored on 09.03.2021 and communication whereof was made subsequently followed by a statutory demand notice dated 18.03.2021. The statement of the opposite party no. 2 was also recorded on 04.01.2025 thereafter, an application came to be preferred by the applicant under Section 143A of the NI Act on 06.02.2025 for awarding interim compensation to the tune of 20% of the total amount of Rs. 25,00,000/- being Rs. 5,00,000/- which on objection by the opposite party no. 2 came to be rejected on 15.07.2025.

4. Questioning the same, the present application has been preferred. 2 NA528 No. 38124 of 2025

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the consideration which weighed the court below while rejecting the application under Section 143A of the NI Act cannot be sustained for the simple reason that here in the present case the cheque in question was dated 01.03.2021 which came to be dishonored post presentation in the bank on 09/10.03.2021 and a statutory demand notice came to be issued on 18.03.2021 and the complaint was registered being No. 85 of 2021, however, the court below had committed a patent error of law in relying upon the judgment in M/s Ginni Garments and another Vs M/s Sethi Garments and others : CRR No. 9872-2018 (O&M), decided on 04.04.2019. Submission is that the law in this regard is well settled i.e. in the case of G.J. Raja Vs.Tejraj Surana (2019) 0 AIR(SC) 3817. Submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the provisions of Section 143A came into statute by Act No. 20 of 2018 with effect from 01.09.2018 and in the present case the cheuqe wahich was dated 01.03.2021 and the complaint stood lodged post enforcement of the said section. He further submits that the case of the applicant ought to have been considered for grant of interim compensation in view of the judgment in Rakesh Ranjan Srivastava v. State of Jharkand and another; (2024) 3 S.C.R. 438.

6. Learned AGA, on the other hand, submits that the order impugned does not advert to the said aspects of the matter. According to him, the order be set aside, matter be remitted back to the court below to pass a fresh order.

7. I have heard the submissions so made across the bar and perused the record carefully.

8. Apparently, with respect to dishonoring of a cheque bearing no. 085856 of Rs. 25,00,000/- dated 01.03.2021 a statutory demand notice came to be issued on 18.03.2021 and the complaint came to be lodged being Complaint Case No. 85 of 2021. An application u/s 143A NI Act came to be preferred by the applicant herein on 06.02.2025. Section 143A of the NI Act came into statute book by virtue of Act No. 20 of 2018 with effect from 01.09.2018. As a matter of fact, the cheque in question is dated 01.03.2021 which is post enforcement of the said section, thus, in view of the judgment in G.J. Raja (supra) the applicability in the present case would arise. The order dated 15.07.2025 impugned in the present application reads as under.- "िदनांक- 15.07.2025 प्ऴावली पेश हुयी। पिरवादी की ओर ्ऺाथर्ना प्ऴ अन्तगर्त धारा 143 ए पर्वाम्य िलखत अिधिनयम िदनांिकत

06.02.2025 ्ऺस्तुत करते हुये कथन िकया है िक उ्व वाद में अिभयु्व ्षारा न्यायालय के सम्ष िदये गये अपने बयान मुिल्जम में पिरवादी के दावे को सही माना है और िवषयगत चैक के भुगतान का वायदा िकया है 3 NA528 No. 38124 of 2025 परन्तु पिरवादी को अन्तिरम मुआवजे की आवश्यकता है। इसिलए पिरवादी िवषयगत चैक की धनरािश मु० 25,00,000/-रु० का 20 ्ऺितशत धनरािश अथार्त् 5,00,000/रु० अिभयु्व से अन्तिरम मुआवजे के रूप में ्ऺाप्त करना चाहता है। पिरावादी स्वंय को वचनब्ध करता है िक यिद न्यायालय अिभयु्व को दोषमु्व कर देता है तो अिभयु्व से पिरवादी को िदलायी गयी अन्तिरम ्ऺितकर की धनरािश माननीय न्यायालय के आदेश अनुसार न्यायालय ्षारा िनधार्िरत की गयी अविध के अन्दर या आदेश की तारीख से 60 िदन के अन्तर तत्कालीन ्ऺचिलत बैंक ब्याज सिहत पिरवादी, अिभयु्व को वापस कर देगा और उन सभी शतॏल का पालन करेगा जो पर्वाम्य िलखत अिधिनयम की धारा 143 के अनुसार न्यायालय ्षारा िनधार्िरत की जायेगी। अतः पिरवादी ्षारा अिभयु्व से िवषयगत चैक की 20 ्ऺितशत धनरािश अन्तिरम ्ऺितकर के रूप में िदलाये जाने की ्ऺाथर्ना की गयी है। अिभयु्वा सरवजीत कौर की ओर से पिरवादी के उ्व ्ऺाथर्ना प्ऴ के िवरु्ध िलिखत आपि्त ्ऺस्तुत कर कथन िकया गया है िक पिरवादी ने अपने ्ऺाथर्ना प्ऴ िदनांिकत 06.02.2025 में यह बात गलत िलखी है िक अिभयु्व ने अपने बयान मुिल्जम में मुकदमें को सही माना है, वास्तिवकता यह है िक सच्चाई के अनुसार अिभयु्व ने चैक पर के वल हस्ता्षर स्वीकार िकये हैं और स्प्ि िकया है िक अिभयु्व को नहीं पता िक िवषयगत चैक पिरवादी पर कै से पहुँचा। पिरवाद प्ऴ के पैरा सं० 3 में िजस भूिम के खरीद फरोख्त की बात िलखी है वास्तव में उस भूिम की खरीद फरोख्त हुयी ही नहीं है, इसिलए िवषयगत चैक पर अंिकत धनरािश िकसी भी लीगल ऋण अथवा दाियत्व के ्ऺितफल में नहीं िदया गया है। इसिलए पिरवाद पोषणीय नहीं है। अिभयु्व के िवरु्ध िवषयगत चैक का इस्तेमाल पिरवादी ने चैक की कू टरचना करके िकया है। चैक के कू टरिचत होने के बाबत पिरवादी ने स्वयं ही अपने पिरवाद के पैरा सं० 3 में िलखा है। अिभयु्व िवषयगत चैक की 20 ्ऺितशत अथवा कोई भी ्ऺितशत की धनरािश दौराने मुकदमा देने में असमथर् है। वह उपरो्व मुकमदें का िनस्तारण जल्द से जल्द ्िायल कराकर कराना चाहती है और इसमें अपना पूणर् सहयोग देने को तैयार है। अतः अिभयु्व की ओर से पिरवादी की ओर से ्ऺस्तुत ्ऺाथर्ना प्ऴ अन्तगर्त धारा 143 ए पर्वाम्य िलखत अिधिनयम को िनरस्त िकये जाने की ्ऺाथर्ना की गयी है। सुना तथा प्ऴावली का अवलोकन िकया। The main point of consideration for deciding the present Application is whether, the newly inserted provision of Section 143 A is applicable to the present case? Section 143 A of the Negotiable Instrument Act has come into force with effect from 02.08.2018. The present case was instituted on 21.04.2018. In this regard, in M/S Ginni Garments and Anr. vs. M/S Sethi Garments, CRR No. 9872-2018 (O&M), decided on 04.04.2019, Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court has held that the Section 143 A of the Negotiable Instruments Act has no retrospective effect whereas the Section 148 will apply to the pending appeals pending on date of enforcement of this provision. It has been observed that, "At the stage of trial, the provision Section 143-A of the Act has created a new 'obligation' against the accused, which was not contemplated by the existing law & which created a substantive liability upon him, whereas the provision of section 148 of the Act only reiterated, and to some extent modified in favour of the appellant, the procedure of recovery already existing in the statue book. It was further observed that "therefore, it has to be held that Section 143- A of the Act cast a substantive obligation upon the accused and thereby effect the substantive right of the accused. Since the Amendment act has not made the provision applicable retrospectively, specifically, to pending cases, hence, it can not be applied 4 NA528 No. 38124 of 2025 retrospectively, to pending cases, which arose from the default of the accuse which has taken place before coming into force of this provision." उपरो्व िविध ्िवस्था के आलोक में न्यायालय का यह मत है िक पिरवादी की ओर से ्ऺस्तुत ्ऺाथर्नाप्ऴ अन्तगर्त धारा 143 ए पर्वाम्य िलखत अिधिनयम िनरस्त िकये जाने योग्य है आदेश पिरवादी की ओर से ्ऺस्तुत ्ऺाथर्ना प्ऴ अन्तगर्त धारा 143 ए पर्वाम्य िलखत अिधिनयम िदनांिकत 06.02.2025 िनरस्त िकया जाता है। प्ऴावली अि्षम कायर्वाही िदनांक 31.07.2025 को पेश हो।"

9. Since the provisions contained under Section 143A which came to be inserted by Act No. 20 of 2018 with effect from 01.09.2018 and the judgment in G.J. Raja (supra) has not been considered in the light of the fact that the cheque in question is dated 01.03.2021 and further the considerations which was mandatory by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Rakesh Ranjan Srivastava (supra) has also not been considered, thus, the order in question cannot be sustained.

10. Accordingly, the application is being decided in the following terms.- (a) the order dated 15.07.2025 passed in Complaint Case No. 85 of 2021 is set aside; (b) matter stands remitted back to the court below to pass a fresh order strictly in accordance with law; (c) for facilitation and early disposal, certified copy of the order be produced before the court below by 31.10.2025 .

11. With the above observations, the application stands disposed of, leaving it open to the applicant to raise all legal and factual issues while contesting the trial. October 6, 2025 Rajesh (Vikas Budhwar,J.) RAJESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

1. Heard Sri Sushil Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri J.P. Gupta, learned AGA for the State.

2. This application u/s 528 of BNSS has been preferred to quash the impugned order dt. 15.7.2025 passed by learned Civil Judge (J.D.)/Judicial Magistrate, Sambhal at Chandausi in Complaint Case No. 85 of 2021 Manoj Kumar Vs. Sarvjeet Kaur, under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, Police Station Bahjoi, District Sambhal, whereby the learned trial Court has rejected the application of the applicant under Section 143A of Negotiable Instrument Act.

3. The case of the applicant is that a complaint stood lodged by the applicant against the opposite party no. 2 with an allegation that with respect to discharge of a liability the applicant herein had drawn a cheque bearing no. 085856 dated 01.03.2021 of an amount of Rs. 25,00,000/- which on presentation in the bank came to be dishonored on 09.03.2021 and communication whereof was made subsequently followed by a statutory demand notice dated 18.03.2021. The statement of the opposite party no. 2 was also recorded on 04.01.2025 thereafter, an application came to be preferred by the applicant under Section 143A of the NI Act on 06.02.2025 for awarding interim compensation to the tune of 20% of the total amount of Rs. 25,00,000/- being Rs. 5,00,000/- which on objection by the opposite party no. 2 came to be rejected on 15.07.2025.

4. Questioning the same, the present application has been preferred. 2 NA528 No. 38124 of 2025

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the consideration which weighed the court below while rejecting the application under Section 143A of the NI Act cannot be sustained for the simple reason that here in the present case the cheque in question was dated 01.03.2021 which came to be dishonored post presentation in the bank on 09/10.03.2021 and a statutory demand notice came to be issued on 18.03.2021 and the complaint was registered being No. 85 of 2021, however, the court below had committed a patent error of law in relying upon the judgment in M/s Ginni Garments and another Vs M/s Sethi Garments and others : CRR No. 9872-2018 (O&M), decided on 04.04.2019. Submission is that the law in this regard is well settled i.e. in the case of G.J. Raja Vs.Tejraj Surana (2019) 0 AIR(SC) 3817. Submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the provisions of Section 143A came into statute by Act No. 20 of 2018 with effect from 01.09.2018 and in the present case the cheuqe wahich was dated 01.03.2021 and the complaint stood lodged post enforcement of the said section. He further submits that the case of the applicant ought to have been considered for grant of interim compensation in view of the judgment in Rakesh Ranjan Srivastava v. State of Jharkand and another; (2024) 3 S.C.R. 438.

6. Learned AGA, on the other hand, submits that the order impugned does not advert to the said aspects of the matter. According to him, the order be set aside, matter be remitted back to the court below to pass a fresh order.

7. I have heard the submissions so made across the bar and perused the record carefully.

8. Apparently, with respect to dishonoring of a cheque bearing no. 085856 of Rs. 25,00,000/- dated 01.03.2021 a statutory demand notice came to be issued on 18.03.2021 and the complaint came to be lodged being Complaint Case No. 85 of 2021. An application u/s 143A NI Act came to be preferred by the applicant herein on 06.02.2025. Section 143A of the NI Act came into statute book by virtue of Act No. 20 of 2018 with effect from 01.09.2018. As a matter of fact, the cheque in question is dated 01.03.2021 which is post enforcement of the said section, thus, in view of the judgment in G.J. Raja (supra) the applicability in the present case would arise. The order dated 15.07.2025 impugned in the present application reads as under.- "िदनांक- 15.07.2025 प्ऴावली पेश हुयी। पिरवादी की ओर ्ऺाथर्ना प्ऴ अन्तगर्त धारा 143 ए पर्वाम्य िलखत अिधिनयम िदनांिकत

06.02.2025 ्ऺस्तुत करते हुये कथन िकया है िक उ्व वाद में अिभयु्व ्षारा न्यायालय के सम्ष िदये गये अपने बयान मुिल्जम में पिरवादी के दावे को सही माना है और िवषयगत चैक के भुगतान का वायदा िकया है 3 NA528 No. 38124 of 2025 परन्तु पिरवादी को अन्तिरम मुआवजे की आवश्यकता है। इसिलए पिरवादी िवषयगत चैक की धनरािश मु० 25,00,000/-रु० का 20 ्ऺितशत धनरािश अथार्त् 5,00,000/रु० अिभयु्व से अन्तिरम मुआवजे के रूप में ्ऺाप्त करना चाहता है। पिरावादी स्वंय को वचनब्ध करता है िक यिद न्यायालय अिभयु्व को दोषमु्व कर देता है तो अिभयु्व से पिरवादी को िदलायी गयी अन्तिरम ्ऺितकर की धनरािश माननीय न्यायालय के आदेश अनुसार न्यायालय ्षारा िनधार्िरत की गयी अविध के अन्दर या आदेश की तारीख से 60 िदन के अन्तर तत्कालीन ्ऺचिलत बैंक ब्याज सिहत पिरवादी, अिभयु्व को वापस कर देगा और उन सभी शतॏल का पालन करेगा जो पर्वाम्य िलखत अिधिनयम की धारा 143 के अनुसार न्यायालय ्षारा िनधार्िरत की जायेगी। अतः पिरवादी ्षारा अिभयु्व से िवषयगत चैक की 20 ्ऺितशत धनरािश अन्तिरम ्ऺितकर के रूप में िदलाये जाने की ्ऺाथर्ना की गयी है। अिभयु्वा सरवजीत कौर की ओर से पिरवादी के उ्व ्ऺाथर्ना प्ऴ के िवरु्ध िलिखत आपि्त ्ऺस्तुत कर कथन िकया गया है िक पिरवादी ने अपने ्ऺाथर्ना प्ऴ िदनांिकत 06.02.2025 में यह बात गलत िलखी है िक अिभयु्व ने अपने बयान मुिल्जम में मुकदमें को सही माना है, वास्तिवकता यह है िक सच्चाई के अनुसार अिभयु्व ने चैक पर के वल हस्ता्षर स्वीकार िकये हैं और स्प्ि िकया है िक अिभयु्व को नहीं पता िक िवषयगत चैक पिरवादी पर कै से पहुँचा। पिरवाद प्ऴ के पैरा सं० 3 में िजस भूिम के खरीद फरोख्त की बात िलखी है वास्तव में उस भूिम की खरीद फरोख्त हुयी ही नहीं है, इसिलए िवषयगत चैक पर अंिकत धनरािश िकसी भी लीगल ऋण अथवा दाियत्व के ्ऺितफल में नहीं िदया गया है। इसिलए पिरवाद पोषणीय नहीं है। अिभयु्व के िवरु्ध िवषयगत चैक का इस्तेमाल पिरवादी ने चैक की कू टरचना करके िकया है। चैक के कू टरिचत होने के बाबत पिरवादी ने स्वयं ही अपने पिरवाद के पैरा सं० 3 में िलखा है। अिभयु्व िवषयगत चैक की 20 ्ऺितशत अथवा कोई भी ्ऺितशत की धनरािश दौराने मुकदमा देने में असमथर् है। वह उपरो्व मुकमदें का िनस्तारण जल्द से जल्द ्िायल कराकर कराना चाहती है और इसमें अपना पूणर् सहयोग देने को तैयार है। अतः अिभयु्व की ओर से पिरवादी की ओर से ्ऺस्तुत ्ऺाथर्ना प्ऴ अन्तगर्त धारा 143 ए पर्वाम्य िलखत अिधिनयम को िनरस्त िकये जाने की ्ऺाथर्ना की गयी है। सुना तथा प्ऴावली का अवलोकन िकया। The main point of consideration for deciding the present Application is whether, the newly inserted provision of Section 143 A is applicable to the present case? Section 143 A of the Negotiable Instrument Act has come into force with effect from 02.08.2018. The present case was instituted on 21.04.2018. In this regard, in M/S Ginni Garments and Anr. vs. M/S Sethi Garments, CRR No. 9872-2018 (O&M), decided on 04.04.2019, Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court has held that the Section 143 A of the Negotiable Instruments Act has no retrospective effect whereas the Section 148 will apply to the pending appeals pending on date of enforcement of this provision. It has been observed that, "At the stage of trial, the provision Section 143-A of the Act has created a new 'obligation' against the accused, which was not contemplated by the existing law & which created a substantive liability upon him, whereas the provision of section 148 of the Act only reiterated, and to some extent modified in favour of the appellant, the procedure of recovery already existing in the statue book. It was further observed that "therefore, it has to be held that Section 143- A of the Act cast a substantive obligation upon the accused and thereby effect the substantive right of the accused. Since the Amendment act has not made the provision applicable retrospectively, specifically, to pending cases, hence, it can not be applied 4 NA528 No. 38124 of 2025 retrospectively, to pending cases, which arose from the default of the accuse which has taken place before coming into force of this provision." उपरो्व िविध ्िवस्था के आलोक में न्यायालय का यह मत है िक पिरवादी की ओर से ्ऺस्तुत ्ऺाथर्नाप्ऴ अन्तगर्त धारा 143 ए पर्वाम्य िलखत अिधिनयम िनरस्त िकये जाने योग्य है आदेश पिरवादी की ओर से ्ऺस्तुत ्ऺाथर्ना प्ऴ अन्तगर्त धारा 143 ए पर्वाम्य िलखत अिधिनयम िदनांिकत 06.02.2025 िनरस्त िकया जाता है। प्ऴावली अि्षम कायर्वाही िदनांक 31.07.2025 को पेश हो।"

9. Since the provisions contained under Section 143A which came to be inserted by Act No. 20 of 2018 with effect from 01.09.2018 and the judgment in G.J. Raja (supra) has not been considered in the light of the fact that the cheque in question is dated 01.03.2021 and further the considerations which was mandatory by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Rakesh Ranjan Srivastava (supra) has also not been considered, thus, the order in question cannot be sustained.

10. Accordingly, the application is being decided in the following terms.- (a) the order dated 15.07.2025 passed in Complaint Case No. 85 of 2021 is set aside; (b) matter stands remitted back to the court below to pass a fresh order strictly in accordance with law; (c) for facilitation and early disposal, certified copy of the order be produced before the court below by 31.10.2025 .

11. With the above observations, the application stands disposed of, leaving it open to the applicant to raise all legal and factual issues while contesting the trial. October 6, 2025 Rajesh (Vikas Budhwar,J.) RAJESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad