9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (9) TMI 296X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e facts of the case on hand, it can not be said that the trial court exercised its discretion erroneously or improperly by passing the impugned order warranting interference by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The contention of the petitioner that in the absence of an application filed under Section 143-A of the N.I Act by the complainant, it was not open for the trial court to invoke the said provision is misconceived and untenable. A plain reading of the said provision coupled with the very object/intendment of the legislature in introducing the said provision by way of amendment is sufficient to indicate that the trial court was fully justified in invoking the said provision and passing the impugned discretionary order even withou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ivered cheque bearing No.368623 dated 16.11.2018 in a sum of ₹ 7,00,000/-. The said cheque having been dishonoured for want of sufficient funds, statutory notice dated 14.12.2018 was issued on behalf of the complainant which was received by the accused on 15.12.2018. It was contended that since the accused failed to comply with the demand made in the said notice and thereby committed the aforesaid offence, the complainant filed the said private complaint before the trial Court. 3. On 02.02.2019, the trial Court took cognizance of the said offence and having registered the aforesaid case and having examined the complainant (PW1) who also filed his affidavit and got marked documents at Ex.P.1 to P.5 and after hearing the learned coun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act. It was pointed out that even as per the amended provisions of Sec.143-A, the usage of the word 'may' in Sec.143-A(1) clearly indicates that it was not mandatory but only directory and as such, the trial Court had not exercised its discretion properly and legally while passing the impugned order. Learned counsel places reliance upon the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of LGR Enterprises V. P.Anbazhagan - Crl. O.P. Nos.15438/2019 and connected matters dated 12.07.2019 in support of his submissions. 7. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the material on record, the discretionary order passed by the trial court by invoking S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he accused did not comply with the demand made in the said notice. A perusal of the material on record viz., complaint, sworn statement, affidavit, documents, order dated 2-2-2019 passed by the trial court taking cognizance of the case and issuing summons to the accused, bail application filed by the accused, order passed by the trial court granting bail to the accused etc., as well as the facts/ grounds/documents filed in the present petition will clearly indicate that the defence of the accused is not forthcoming in any of the aforesaid documents. So also, the presumption under Section 139 of the N.I Act that arises in favour of complainant and against the accused has also not been rebutted by the accused so far. While it is true that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue amount. Under these circumstances, the impugned discretionary order passed by the trial Court, in the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the instant case, being just and proper and not resulting in the abuse of the process of the court and interference not being warranted to secure the ends of justice, the same does not warrant interference by this Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction u/s 482 of Cr.P.C. c) The contention of the petitioner that in the absence of an application filed under Section 143-A of the N.I Act by the complainant, it was not open for the trial court to invoke the said provision is misconceived and untenable. A plain reading of the said provision coupled with the very object/intendment of the legislature in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion of the accused that in the event he is directed to pay 20% of the cheque amount to the complainant and the accused is ultimately acquitted by the trial court, the accused would find it difficult to get refund of the said amount is concerned, the said apprehension can be allayed in view of the fact that apart from the buffers/safeguards already existing in Section 143-A(4) of the N.I Act, necessary directions by balancing equities can also be issued by this Court in this regard. So also, necessary directions for speedy and expeditious disposal of the case can be given so as to ensure that no prejudice or injustice is caused to either party. f) Insofar as the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of LGR Enterprises supra is con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
