Patna High Court
Vikash Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 24 April, 2025
Author: Chandra Shekhar Jha
Bench: Chandra Shekhar Jha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12872 of 2023
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-969 Year-2019 Thana- SAMASTIPUR COMPLAINT CASE
District- Samastipur
======================================================
Vikash Kumar S/o Arun Sah R/o Ambedkar Nagar, Near House of Talim
Miyan, Ward no. 22, P.S.- Nagar Samastipur, Distt- Samastipur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Vijay Sah S/o Jung Bahadur Sah, R/o- Bahadurpur, P.S.- Town Samastipur,
Distt- Samastipur.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Deepak Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ashok Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 24-04-2025
Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
parties.
2. At the outset, the matter is pending for removal of
defect(s) since last three years, which has not been removed by
learned counsel appearing for petitioner, accordingly same be
ignored for the present, in view of his request, as he is ready to
argue on the point of admission.
3. The present application has been filed for quashing of
cognizance order dated 29.07.2019 in Complaint Case bearing CR.
(P) Case No. 969 of 2019 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate,
2nd Class, Samastipur for the offences punishable under Section
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12872 of 2023 dt.24-04-2025
2/5
138 of the N.I. Act.
4. It appears out of submission of learned counsel for
the parties and upon perusal of record that learned JMFC,
Samastipur vide its order dated 22.04.2022 directed petitioner to
deposit Rs. 20% of the instrument amount i.e. Rs. 10 lacs in view
of legal provision as available under Section 143A of the
Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 against which petitioner
preferred revision before the Court of Additional District and
Sessions Judge-IX, Samastipur, where the impugned order to
deposit Rs. 20% of instrument amount was upheld by dismissing
the revision petition preferred by petitioner bearing Cr. Revision
No. 395 of 2022 vide its order dated 14.12.2022.
5. Hence the present quashing petition.
6. It would be apposite to reproduce impugned order
dated 22.04.2022, which reads as under:-
"ifjoknh ds fo}ku vf/koDrk fuonsu djrs gSa]
fd ;g okn ,u0vkbZ0 ,DV dh /kkjk 138 ds vUrxZr py
jgk gS ftlesa vfHk;qDr fodk"k dqekj ij 10 yk[k #i;s dks
ysus ds ckn mDr jkf"k dks okil ugha djus dk vfHk;ksx gSA
vfHk;qDr dks orZeku esa dqy cdk;k jkf"k esa ls 25 izfr"kr
#i;k tks 2]50]000 #i;k curk gS rRdky ykSVkus dk vkns"k
fn;k tk;A ;fn mDr jkf"k dks vfHk;qDr }kjk ugha ykSVk;k
tkrk gS rks izkFkhZ dks Hkkjh {kfr gksxhA
cpko i{k ds fo}ku vf/koDrk ds }kjk blds izR;qrj
esa dgk x;k gS] fd ifjoknh }kjk fn;k x;k vkosnu U;k; ds
foijhr rFkk xyr rF;ksa ij vk/kkfjr gSA blfy, ifjoknh
dk vkosnu [kkfjt fd;k tk;A
lquk x;k rFkk vfHkys[k dk voyksdu fd;k x;k]
bl okn esa fnukad 29@07@19 dks vfHk;qDr fodk"k dqekj
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12872 of 2023 dt.24-04-2025
3/5
ds f[kykQ ,uvkbZ0 ,DV dh /kkjk 138 ds vUrxZr izFke
n`'V;k ekeyk cukA vfHk;qDr ij ifjoknh ds 10 yk[k #i;k
dks ysdj okil ugha djus dk vfHk;ksx py jgk gSA orZeku
esa mijksDr vfHk;qDr dh mifLFkfr iqjh gks pqdh gSA
,u0vkbZ0 ,DV dk fu;e gS] fd igyh mifLFkfr esa dqy ns;
jkf"k dk 20 izfr"kr tek djuk gksrk gSA vr% mijksDr
rF;ksa ds vkyksd esa vfHk;qDr dks funsZ"k fn;k tkrk gS] fd
og dqy ns; jkf"k dk 20 izfr"kr tks 2]00]000 #i;k curk
gS ifjoknh dks vxyh frfFk ij Hkqxrku djsA rnuqlkj bl
vkosnu dks fuLrkfjr fd;k tkrk gSA"
7. It would be further apposite to reproduce
revisional order dated 14.12.2022, which reads as under:-
"1. This Criminal Revision is directed
against the order dated 22.04.2022 passed by
learned Judicial Magistrate, Samastipur in C.R.
case no. 969/2019 by which the ld. Judicial
Magistrate, Samastipur directed the petitioner to
deposit 20% of Rs. 10 lakh i.e., Rs. 2 lakh in the
case registered u/s-138 of N.I Act.
2. It was stated by the petitioner
(revisionist) that the Impugned order dated
22.04.2022
passed by ld. Judicial Magistrate,
Samastipur was bad in law and wrong on facts and
was passed without application of judicial mind. It
was further stated by the petitioner that ld. Court
failed to appreciate this fact that the petitioner
had filed a criminal case against the complainant
who forcefully took the said cheque from the
petitioner and so it was prayed to allow this
Criminal Revision and set aside the impugned
order dt. 22.04.2022 passed in C.R Case No-
969/2019.
3. The ld. A.P.P on behalf of opposite-
1st party and ld. Counsel of O.P-2nd party
submitted during the course of hearing that there
was no irregularity in the order dated 22.04.2022
passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate,
Samastipur in C.R No-969/2019 and so this
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12872 of 2023 dt.24-04-2025
Criminal Revision was liable to be dismissed.
4. Heard learned counsels of both sides
and perused the case record of C.R. Case No-
969/2019. From perusal of the case record of C.R
Case No-969/2019, it appears that the
complainant (O.P 2nd party) filed this complaint
Case against the petitioner u/s-138 N.I Act stating
that the - Complainant gave Rs. 10 lakh to the
petitioner as the petitioner was in need of money
for his business and the petitioner later on gave a
cheque of Rs. 10 lakh to the complainant in lieu of
returning the money but the said cheque was
dishonoured due to insufficient fund and after
sending the pleader's notice, the complainant filed
complaint case against the petitioner and the ld.
Court passed summoning order on 29.07.2019
after considering the materials available on the
case records and held that a prima-facie case u/s-
138 N.I Act was made out against the petitioner.
Accordingly, after explaining the accusation to the
accused petitioner the ld. Court vide order dated
22.04.2022 directed the petitioner to deposit 20%
of the total amount of Rs. 10 lakh i.e., Rs. 2 lakh
in favour of the complainant. Evidently, as per the
provisions laid down under N.I Act, 20% amount
of the total cheque is to be deposited by the
petitioner as interim compensation. Hence, in light
of the provisions laid down under amended N.I
Act, the ld. Court directed the petitioner to deposit
20% of the amount of the total cheque which
comes out to be Rs. 2 lakh.
5. Therefore, there seems no illegality
or irregularity in the order dated 22.04.2022
passed by ld. Judicial Magistrate, Samastipur in
C.R. Case No-969/2019 and so, the present
Criminal Revision is hereby dismissed. Let a copy
of this order along with the original case record be
sent to the ld. Court concerned."
8. In view of aforesaid facts and circumstances, the first
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12872 of 2023 dt.24-04-2025
impugned order dated 22.04.2022, in which it was directed to pay
20% of instrument amount of Rs. 10 lacs i.e. Rs. 2 lacs appears in
view of statutory provisions being interim compensation as
available under Section 143A of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881,
which was rightly declined by learned Sessions Judge through Cr.
Revision No. 395 of 2022 dated 14.12.2022 discussed aforesaid,
as there was no illegality.
9. In view of aforesaid, the present petition appears
devoid of any merit, rather a deliberate attempt to delay the
payment as directed by learned J.M.F.C. cum Additional Munsif,
Samstipur vide its order dated 22.04.2022.
10. Accordingly, the present petition stands dismissed
at admission stage itself.
11. Let copy of this order be sent to the trial court,
without delay.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
veena/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 25.04.2025
Transmission Date 25.04.2025
