Calcutta High Court: The single judge bench of Bibek Chaudhuri,* J. has held that an application under S. 143-A of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is not needed to be disposed of on the date of examination of the accused under S. 251 of the CrPC, the same can be disposed of at any point of time.
Factual Matrix
In the instant matter, the opposite party-complainant filed a complaint against the petitioner-accused under S. 138 of the NI Act when the complainant deposited the cheque issued by the petitioner as the payment for the order of N-95 (5 layers) Mask and Surgical Mask for encashment and the same was dishonored due to insufficiency of fund. The complainant was examined under S. 200 of the CrPC and filed her evidence on affidavit in terms of S. 145(1) of the NI Act.
The Judicial Magistrate vide order dated 07-10-2021, allowed the application filed by the complainant under S. 143-A of the NI Act for payment of interim compensation by the accused without mentioning any mode of payment. The accused was examined under S. 251 of the CrPC and the Judicial Magistrate vide order dated 03-12-2021, refused the accused petition praying for modification of the order dated 07-10-2021 and fixed the next date of the hearing on 15-03-2022.
Aggrieved by the impugned orders dated 07-10-2021 and 03-12-2021 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, the accused preferred the present revision application and contended that the Judicial Magistrate made an error in passing the impugned orders as the application under S. 143-A of the NI Act was not heard and disposed of.
Observation
The Court observed that S. 143-A(a) and (b) of the NI Act empowers the Court to order the drawer of the cheque to pay interim compensation to the complainant where the accused pleads not guilty to the accusations made in the complaint.
The Court remarked that it is not mandatory that on the date of examination of the accused under S. 251 of the CrPC, the application under S. 143-A of the NI Act should be disposed of, it can be disposed of at any point of time.
The Court observed that the accused’s opportunity to cross-examine the complainant (PW1) was taken away from him by fixing the next date for examination of the accused under S. 313 of the CrPC and hearing of the petition under S. 143-A of the NI Act.
Verdict
While disposing of the present revision, the Court, for ends of justice, directed the Trial Court to give opportunity to the accused to cross-examine PW1 and disposed of the application under S. 143-A of the NI Act without giving any adjournment to either of the parties.
[Susanta Chakraborty v. Dey’s Construction, 2023 SCC OnLine Cal 1045, order dated 04-05-2023]
*Judgment by Justice Bibek Chaudhuri
Advocates who appeared in this case :
Mr. Sayan Chattapadhyay and Ms. Payel Shome, Counsel for the Petitioner;
Mr. Debasis Kar and Mr. Subhajit Chowdhury, Counsel for the Opposite Party.
