Uttarakhand High Court
Unknown vs Mbl Infrastructure Limited. ... on 19 August, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
SRI JUSTICE RAKESH THAPLIYAL, J.
19TH AUGUST, 2023
C-482 APPLICATION No. 169 OF 2023
Between:
M/s RPG Infratech ...........Applicant
and
MBL Infrastructure Limited and others. ...Respondents
Counsel for the applicant : Mr. Piyush Garg.
Counsel for the respondents : Ms. Anusuya Salwan & Mr. H.M.
Bhatia.
Upon hearing the learned Counsel, the Court
made the following
ORDER :
By the present C-482 petition, the applicant-
M/s RPG Infratech has challenged the order dated
17.01.2023 as well as order dated 10.12.2021 passed
by learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranikhet, Almora in
Criminal Case No. 109 of 2017 M/s RPG Infratech vs.
MBL Infrastructure Limited. These two orders are
challenged by the applicant on the ground that the
proceeding pertains to Section 138 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act, 1881 and these are summary
proceedings, however, by order dated 10.12.2021,
learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranikhet, without applying
his mind and without recording reasons, converted the
summary trial to summons trial and fixed 18.12.2021
for cross examination of the complainant. In reference
to this, counsel for the applicant refers to the guidelines
of this Court dated 01.09.2021, a copy of which is also
appended to this petition as Annexure-11. Further in
support of his contention, he has relied upon the
judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in In Re:
Expeditious Trial of Cass under Section 138 of
N.I. Act 1881, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 325 (Suo Moto
Writ Petition (Crl) No. 2 of 2020, decided on
16.04.2021) and he has placed reliance on Paragraphs
7, 8 & 9 of the said judgment.
2. Counsel for the applicant submits that in view
of the guidelines of this Court dated 01.09.2021 and
the aforesaid judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court,
the order impugned cannot sustain, since the learned
Judicial Magistrate has not applied its mind and has not
given any reasons.
3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the
respondents Ms. Anusuya Salwan argued that the
learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranikhet, Almora passed
the order on 10.12.2021 for cross-examination of the
complainant on 18.12.2021, but he presented himself
for cross-examination on 06.07.2022, and on that he
was cross-examined partially as PW-1. After the cross-
examination of the applicant/complainant,
adjournments were sought by the present applicant on
different dates, i.e. on 20.07.2022, 27.07.2022,
05.08.2022, 16.08.2022, 23.08.2022, 01.09.2022,
14.09.2022, 09.11.2022, 05.12.2022, 13.12.2022 and
17.01.2023.
4. The last order dated 17.01.2023 was also
challenged by the applicant in the present C-482
petition.
5. I have gone through the aforesaid judgment
of the Supreme Court, on which reliance has been
placed by the counsel for the applicant and the
guidelines of the High Court dated 01.09.2021, and
after perusing the same, this Court is of the view that
the object of Section 143 of the Negotiable Instruments
Act, 1881 is only a quick disposal of the trial. It is very
strange in this case that the applicant himself is the
complainant and he also partially participated in the
cross-examination on 06.07.2022, and he, after
participating, sought several adjournments. Though
the impugned order was passed 10.12.2021, he never
approached this Court for challenging the same within
the reasonable time, and after participating in the
cross-examination on 06.07.2022, he took several
adjournments and on 17.01.2023, only when the
adjournment was granted to him at the costs of Rs.
5,000/-, he filed this petition.
6. In view of the aforesaid judgment, rendered
by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the object of Section
143 is a quick disposal of trial under Section 138 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act.
7. Here the applicant, who himself is the
complainant, first appears before the Court below for
his cross-examination and then seeks several
adjournments and challenges the order on the ground
that the learned Judicial Magistrate while passing the
order impugned has not applied his mind and recorded
reasons. Once, he participated and appeared before
the Court below for his cross-examination, then he
cannot challenge the same on the ground that the
learned Judicial Magistrate cannot convert the summary
trial to summons trial, without recording any reasons.
Apart from this, as observed above, the object of
Section 143 of N.I. Act is for quick disposal, but here
the conduct of the applicant itself shows that he is
delaying the proceedings, as he is seeking repeated
adjournments and there is no denial to this.
8. The matter was listed yesterday and both the
counsels had argued at great length, and then the
matter was fixed for today for further arguments.
However, during the course of arguments today,
counsel for the applicant submits that he has received
instructions from his client that the proceedings of
Criminal Case No. 109 of 2017 M/s RPG Infratech vs.
MBL Infrastructure Limited pending before the learned
Judicial Magistrate, Ranikhet, Almora be expedited.
9. In view of such submission of learned counsel
for the applicant, which is based upon the instructions
as received by him from his client, the present C-482
petition is disposed of finally with a direction to the
learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranikhet, Almora, to
expedite the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 109 of
2017 M/s RPG Infratech vs. MBL Infrastructure Limited
positively within a period of three months from the date
of production of a certified copy of this order.
10. Mr. Rajat Kumar Garg, who was partially
cross examined on 06.07.2022, will ensure his
presence before the learned Judicial Magistrate,
Ranikhet, Almora on 01.09.2023 for further cross-
examination, and the learned Judicial Magistrate,
Ranikhet, Almora shall proceed further to expedite the
proceedings of Criminal Case No. 109 of 2017 M/s RPG
Infratech vs. MBL Infrastructure Limited, after cross-
examination of Mr. Rajat Kumar Garg and will not grant
any undue adjournment to the parties of the
proceedings.
11. Let a certified copy of this order be issued to
the parties by 21.08.2023, on payment of the
prescribed charges as per rules.
__________________
RAKESH THAPLIYAL, J.
Dt: 19th August, 2023
Rathour
