Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 1261 P&H
Judgement Date : 20 January, 2023
120+246
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-52860-2022 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 20.01.2023
GAGAN GANDHI
...Petitioner
Versus
RAJ KUMAR SHARMA
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSH BUNGER
Present : Mr. Gurmandeep Singh Sullar, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Kr. Prashant Singh Chauhan, Advocate
for the respondent.
HARSH BUNGER, J.
Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is for quashing of complaint No.NI-
1015-2019 dated 10.05.2019, registered under Sections 138/142 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 titled as Raj Kumar Sharma vs Gagan
Gandhi (Annexure P-1), pending before the Court of learned Additional
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rewari (Haryana) along with all subsequent
proceedings arising therefrom.
After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the petitioner
restricts his claim only qua order dated 15.09.2021 passed by learned
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rewari, whereby, the petitioner has
been directed to pay interim compensation to the complainant as 20% of the
1 of 4
cheque amount in terms of Section 143-A of the Negotiable Instruments
Act. Said order dated 15.09.2021 reads as under :-
"Present:- Complainant in person with Sh. Bhupender Sharma, counsel.
Accused on bail with Sh. Ricky Chopra, counsel.
An application for 143(A) of the NI Act for giving directions to the accused to pay 20% of the cheque amount as interim relief to the complainant filed. As per the provisions of Section 143A NI Act, the application is allowed and the accused is directed to pay 20% of the cheque amount to the complainant as interim compensation on the next date of hearing. An application under Section 145(2) of NI Act has been filed for cross-examination of complainant filed. The same is allowed. Now, to come upon 09.12.2021 for cross- examination for complainant as well as payment of interim compensation 20% by the accused."
Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the
impugned order, whereby, the petitioner has been directed to pay interim
compensation to the complainant as per the provisions of Section 143(A) of
Negotiable Instruments Act, is totally non-speaking and illegal, being
passed in mechanical manner without application of mind. He further
contended that recently Delhi High Court in CRL. MC 2663 of 2021 M/s
Jsb Cargo and Freight Forwarder Pvt. Ltd v. State and another; decided
on 20.12.2021, held that provision of Section 143(A) Negotiable
Instruments Act, essentially is directory and cannot be termed as mandatory
in nature. Learned counsel further contended that it appears that the trial
Court gave the impugned direction, having the impression that the aforesaid
provision is mandatory in nature.
In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the petitioner
relies upon judgment of this Court in Harjeet Singh vs Gagandeep Singh
2 of 4
(CRM-M-20918 of 2022, decided on 05.07.2022), judgment of Madras
High Court in L.G.R. Enterprises vs P. Anbazhagan (Crl. O.P. No.15438
of 2019, decided on 12.07.2019) as well as judgment of Karnataka High
Court in Smt. Vijaya vs Shekharappa and others 2022(2) Cri.CC 14.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent has
supported the order dated 15.09.2021 passed by learned Additional Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Rewari, by submitting that the trial Court has rightly
granted interim compensation under Section 143-A of the Negotiable
Instruments Act; however, he does not dispute the fact that aforesaid order
dated 15.09.2021 is totally non-speaking order.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
paper book with their able assistance.
From the perusal of impugned order dated 15.09.2021 passed
by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rewari, it appears that the
trial Court granted interim compensation under Section 143(A) of the
Negotiable Instruments Act just in a routine manner and there is no
application of mind as to why the said interim compensation has been
awarded. The afore-extracted order passed by the Court below does not
bear reason as to why 20% of the amount is awarded as interim
compensation. It is not that 20% has to be the interim compensation in
every case. Here again the discretion is required to be exercised by the
learned Magistrate as the interim compensation can vary from 1% to 20%
but shall not exceed 20%. The language of Section 143A being couched
with such discretion, the discretion if not exercised in a manner known to
law, becomes an arbitrary action.
Accordingly, in view of the afore-mentioned facts and
circumstances, order dated 15.09.2021 passed by learned Additional Chief
3 of 4
Judicial Magistrate, Rewari, is set aside qua the decision on application
under Section 143-A of the Negotiable Instruments Act with a direction to
the trial Court to reconsider the issue regarding payment of interim
compensation under Section 143-A of the Negotiable Instruments Act
afresh by passing a speaking order in accordance with law.
Disposed of accordingly.
Pending application/s, if any, shall also stand disposed of.
January 20, 2023 (HARSH BUNGER)
gurpreet JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
4 of 4
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!