Dalip Kumar vs Sachin Singal
2023 Latest Caselaw 14044 P&H

                                                    Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:111923




                                                             2023:PHHC:111923

CRM-M-9668-2019 (O & M)                                                       ::1::

(263)




 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

                      CRM-M-9668-2019 (O & M)
                      Date of decision: 24.08.2023
Dalip Kumar                                                   ...... Petitioner

           V/s
Sachin Singhal                                                   ...Respondent



CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI
Present:      Mr. Aalok Jagga, Advocate,
              and Mr. APS Mann, Advocate, for the petitioner.

              Mr. Rajat Malhotra, Advocate,
              for the respondent.

              *****

JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. (Oral)

The prayer in the present petition, filed under Section 482

Cr.P.C., is for setting aside the order dated 28.01.2019 (Annexure P-1),

passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ludhiana in complaint filed

under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short 'the Act'),

vide which, the petitioner has been directed to deposit the 5% of the cheque

amount as interim compensation.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the complaint

under Section 138 of the Act was filed on 15.05.2018. During the pendency

of the trial, the trial Court has passed the impugned order dated 28.01.2019

(Annexure P-1), exercising the powers under Section 143-A of the Act,

1 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:111923

2023:PHHC:111923

CRM-M-9668-2019 (O & M) ::2::

whereby the petitioner has been directed to pay 5% of the cheque amount as

interim compensation to the complainant.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Section 143-A

of the Act was introduced, for the first time, on 02.08.2018 but w.e.f.

01.09.2018 and since Section 143-A of the Act is meant to create a

substantive liability against the accused, therefore, the said provision cannot

be applied to the pending cases, because if it is so applied, then this would

tantamount to giving retrospective effect to this provision. However, the

substantial right of the petitioners cannot be affected retrospectively, unless

the provision of law specifically so prescribes.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that since

there is no enabling provision that the amendment in Act has retrospective

operation, the powers under Section 143-A of the Act could not have been

exercised by the trial Court against the petitioner, in the pending trial.

The above point of law, raised by learned counsel for the

petitioner, has already been considered in detail and decided by a Coordinate

Bench of this Court in M/s Ginni Garments and another vs. M/s Sethi

Garments and another, 2019 (2) R.C.R. (Criminal) 833 which stands

upheld by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Surinder Singh Deswal @ Col. S. S.

Deswal and others vs. Virender Gandhi, 2019 (3) R.C.R. (Criminal) 186.

In the aforesaid case, it has been held that since the provision of

Section 143-A of the Act has cast substantive obligation upon the accused,

which has the effect of infringing upon the substantial right of the accused,

2 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:111923

2023:PHHC:111923

CRM-M-9668-2019 (O & M) ::3::

therefore, this provision cannot be applied retrospectively to the cases which

were pending on the date of coming into force of the amendment.

Therefore, in view of the aforesaid judgments rendered in M/s

Ginni Garments and Surinder Singh Deswal's cases (supra), the present

petition is allowed and impugned order dated 28.01.2019 (Annexure P-1) is

hereby set aside

( JASJIT SINGH BEDI) August 24, 2023 JUDGE sukhpreet Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:111923

3 of 3