High CourtsSingle Bench

Mohd. Ashfaque Ahmed vs Mahesh Chandra

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 5 December 2019 · Citation: (2019) 12 RAJ CK 0016

HON’BLE JUDGES
Manoj Kumar Garg, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 482 · Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 138, 143A
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 5309 Of 2019
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 507 words

Instant misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 30.08.2019 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,Makrana, District Nagaur whereby the learned Judge allowed the application flied by the respondent-complainant under Section 143A of NI Act and directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.37,500/- to the respondent as interim compensation in accordance with Section 143A of the NI Act within two months from the date of order.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned trial court has committed grave error in directing the petitioner to pay interim compensation to the respondent in view of the provisions of Section 143A of NI Act. Counsel submits that provisions of Section 143A of the Act were inserted in the statute book on 01.09.2018 whereas the complaint under Section 138 of the Act was filed by the respondent in the month of 24.08.2018, therefore the aforesaid provisions would be applied prospectively, hence the aforesaid amendment is not applicable in the present case and on this ground the order impugned is liable to be quashed and set aside. To buttress his contention, counsel has relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of G.J. Raja Vs. Tejraj Surana, Criminal Appeal No.1160/2019, decided on 30.07.2019.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the impugned order as well as the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

In the case of GJ Raja (Supra), the Hon'ble Apex Court has discussed the issue involved in the present case in detail and in para 24 has held as under :

"In the ultimate analysis, we hold Section 143A to be prospective in operation and that the provisions of said Section 143A can be applied or invoked only in cases where the offence under Section 138 of the Act was committed after the introduction of said Section 143A in the statute book. Consequently, the orders passed by the Trial Court as well as the High Court are required to be set aside. The money deposited by the Appellant, pursuant to the interim direction passed by this Court, shall be returned to the Appellant along with interest accrued thereon within two weeks from the date of this order. "

In the present case the complaint under Section 138 of NI Act was filed on 24.08.2018 whereas, provisions of Section 143A of the Act were inserted in the statute book w.e.f. 01.09.2018.

Thus in view of the authoritative pronouncement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GJ Raja (Supra), this Court is of the opinion that the learned trial court has committed error in awarding interim maintenance in favour of the complainant as the provisions of Section 143A of the Act are to be applied prospectively and not retrospectively.

In view of above, the criminal misc. petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 30.08.2019 passed by the trial court directing the petitioner to pay interim compensation of Rs.37,500/- to the complainant is set aside.

Stay application is also decided.