Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Sidharth Jain,S/O- Bhag Chand Jain vs Nidhi Financial Services on 6 January, 2022
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No.5155/2021
Sidharth Jain, s/o- Bhag Chand Jain, Aged About 45 Years, R/o-
Plot No-246, Mahaveer Nager, Tonk Road, Durgapura Jaipur.
(Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
Nidhi Financial Services, Through Proprietor Sh. Laxmikant
Biyani S/o - Late. Sh. Shiv Bhagwan Biyani, R/o- 607-A, kristal
Mal, Near Moti Mahal Cinema, Sawai Jaisingh Highway, Banipark,
Jaipur(Raj.)
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Atul Kumar Jain, Adv.
Through V.C.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Arvind Kumar, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
Order
06/01/2022
By way of the instant miscellaneous petition, a challenge has been made to the order dated 04.04.2019 passed by the Special Magistrate No.7, Negotiable of Instruments Act Cases, Jaipur Metro Jaipur. Subsequently, the order dated 27.02.2020 was passed by the same Court on the ground that the order passed by the learned Court, vide order dated 04.04.2019 regarding payment of interim compensation is not in accordance with law. Counsel submits that in this matter, the complaint was lodged in the year 2017, the act constituting an offence had occurred by 2017, whereas, the concerned provision of under Section 143-A of the Act was came into effect from 01.09.2018. Therefore, the same shall not be applied retrospectively. Counsel place reliance (Downloaded on 12/01/2022 at 09:28:24 PM) (2 of 3) [CRLMP-5155/2021] on the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in G.J. Rana Vs. Tejraz Surana, in Criminal Appeal No.1160/2019 decided on 30.07.2019.
The matter requires consideration.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the order directing to deposit interim compensation is made by the Court to the accused and the same does not affect the right of the complainant in any manner. There would be no need to hear the complainant in this case, its a pure legal question. If notices are issued to the complainant by staying the operation of order dated 04.04.2019 surely it would adversely effect the right of the complainant as the trial would be protracted. It is pure legal question, therefore, learned Public Prosecutor has been directed to assist this Court on this issue.
Learned Public Prosecutor has aptly assisted the Court in this matter while submitting that the issue regarding the applicability of Section 143-A of the Negotiable Instruments Act has been decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgment referred (supra).
I have gone through the order passed by the Court below, I deem it appropriate to allow the instant miscellaneous petition on the following terms that the provision contained in Section 143 of the Negotiable of Instruments Act has no retrospective application as decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgment referred supra. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, after analysis of the provision has ruled that Section 143 is prospective in operation and that the provisions of Section 143-A 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 143-A under the (Downloaded on 12/01/2022 at 09:28:24 PM) (3 of 3) [CRLMP-5155/2021] statute book. Indisputably the cheque dated 09.06.2017 was dishonored and it is evident that the cause of action had arisen prior to the commencement of the said provision.
In this view of the matter, directing the petitioner to deposit the interim compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- to the complainant is not in accordance with law.
Accordingly, the instant miscellaneous petition is allowed and the order dated 04.04.2019 passed by the Special Magistrate No.7, Negotiable of Instruments Act Cases, Jaipur Metro Jaipur and the subsequent order dated 27.02.2020 are hereby quashed and set aside to the extent, it directs the petitioner to deposit the interim compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-. The other content of the order dated 04.04.2019 would remain intact. The trial Court may proceed further in accordance with the provisions of law.
The stay application is also disposed of.
(FARJAND ALI),J Aks/-33 (Downloaded on 12/01/2022 at 09:28:24 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)