{"id":218529,"date":"2019-08-23T10:06:53","date_gmt":"2019-08-23T04:36:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=218529"},"modified":"2019-08-27T10:25:13","modified_gmt":"2019-08-27T04:55:13","slug":"del-hc-complaint-under-s-138-ni-act-dismissed-for-non-prosecution-restored-considering-that-clerk-of-complainants-counsel-noted-wrong-date","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/23\/del-hc-complaint-under-s-138-ni-act-dismissed-for-non-prosecution-restored-considering-that-clerk-of-complainants-counsel-noted-wrong-date\/","title":{"rendered":"Del HC | Complaint under S. 138 NI Act dismissed for non-prosecution restored considering that clerk of complainant’s counsel noted wrong date"},"content":{"rendered":"

Delhi High Court:\u00a0<\/strong>Mukta Gupta, J. allowed a petition filed against the order of the trial Judge whereby the petitioner’s complaint filed for the commission of offence under Section 138\u00a0(dishonour of cheque)\u00a0<\/em>of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, was dismissed for non-prosecution.<\/p>\n

The petitioner had advanced a loan to the respondent who defaulted in repaying the same. The cheque given by the respondent for the discharge of the said liability was also dishonoured. After fulfilling the codal formalities, the petitioner filed a complaint under Section 138.<\/p>\n

The petitioner along with his counsel was present when the Metropolitan Magistrate issued summons against the respondent. Thereafter, on the next date, counsel for the petitioner was present but Metropolitan Magistrate was not available on account of training, Thereafter, counsel for the petitioner was present and bailable warrants were issued against the respondent. When notice was required to be framed, the case was transferred to another Metropolitan Magistrate. On the subsequent date, none appeared before the Metropolitan Magistrate as the advocates were on strike. On the date of the impugned order, the complaint was dismissed on account of non-appearance on behalf of the petitioner.<\/p>\n

The High Court was of the view that the petition ought to be allowed. It was considered that neither the complainant nor his counsel could appear due to strike as mentioned above and that the clerk of the counsel wrongly noted the next date, and therefore the complainant or his counsel could not again appear on the date of the impugned order. In such circumstances of the case, the Court thought it fit to restore petitioner’s complaint on the file of the Metropolitan Magistrate. The petition was accordingly allowed. [Rajeev Kumar v. Gagan Makhija, 2019 SCC OnLine Del 9708<\/b><\/a>, decided on 07-08-2019]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Delhi High Court:\u00a0Mukta Gupta, J. allowed a petition filed against the order of the trial Judge whereby the petitioner’s complaint filed for <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[28514,2862,3301,30292,31300,23584],"class_list":["post-218529","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-cheque","tag-dishonour_of_cheque","tag-liability","tag-loan","tag-non-prosecution","tag-section-138-ni-act"],"yoast_head":"\nDel HC | Complaint under S. 138 NI Act dismissed for non-prosecution restored considering that clerk of complainant's counsel noted wrong date | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/23\/del-hc-complaint-under-s-138-ni-act-dismissed-for-non-prosecution-restored-considering-that-clerk-of-complainants-counsel-noted-wrong-date\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Del HC | Complaint under S. 138 NI Act dismissed for non-prosecution restored considering that clerk of complainant's counsel noted wrong date\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Delhi High Court:\u00a0Mukta Gupta, J. allowed a petition filed against the order of the trial Judge whereby the petitioner’s complaint filed for\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/23\/del-hc-complaint-under-s-138-ni-act-dismissed-for-non-prosecution-restored-considering-that-clerk-of-complainants-counsel-noted-wrong-date\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2019-08-23T04:36:53+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-08-27T04:55:13+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Delhi-HC.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1329\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"888\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"1 minute\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/23\/del-hc-complaint-under-s-138-ni-act-dismissed-for-non-prosecution-restored-considering-that-clerk-of-complainants-counsel-noted-wrong-date\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/23\/del-hc-complaint-under-s-138-ni-act-dismissed-for-non-prosecution-restored-considering-that-clerk-of-complainants-counsel-noted-wrong-date\/\",\"name\":\"Del HC | Complaint under S. 138 NI Act dismissed for non-prosecution restored considering that clerk of complainant's counsel noted wrong date | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2019-08-23T04:36:53+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-08-27T04:55:13+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/23\/del-hc-complaint-under-s-138-ni-act-dismissed-for-non-prosecution-restored-considering-that-clerk-of-complainants-counsel-noted-wrong-date\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/23\/del-hc-complaint-under-s-138-ni-act-dismissed-for-non-prosecution-restored-considering-that-clerk-of-complainants-counsel-noted-wrong-date\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/23\/del-hc-complaint-under-s-138-ni-act-dismissed-for-non-prosecution-restored-considering-that-clerk-of-complainants-counsel-noted-wrong-date\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Del HC | Complaint under S. 138 NI Act dismissed for non-prosecution restored considering that clerk of complainant’s counsel noted wrong date\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Del HC | Complaint under S. 138 NI Act dismissed for non-prosecution restored considering that clerk of complainant's counsel noted wrong date | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/23\/del-hc-complaint-under-s-138-ni-act-dismissed-for-non-prosecution-restored-considering-that-clerk-of-complainants-counsel-noted-wrong-date\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Del HC | Complaint under S. 138 NI Act dismissed for non-prosecution restored considering that clerk of complainant's counsel noted wrong date","og_description":"Delhi High Court:\u00a0Mukta Gupta, J. allowed a petition filed against the order of the trial Judge whereby the petitioner’s complaint filed for","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/23\/del-hc-complaint-under-s-138-ni-act-dismissed-for-non-prosecution-restored-considering-that-clerk-of-complainants-counsel-noted-wrong-date\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2019-08-23T04:36:53+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-08-27T04:55:13+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1329,"height":888,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Delhi-HC.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"1 minute"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/23\/del-hc-complaint-under-s-138-ni-act-dismissed-for-non-prosecution-restored-considering-that-clerk-of-complainants-counsel-noted-wrong-date\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/23\/del-hc-complaint-under-s-138-ni-act-dismissed-for-non-prosecution-restored-considering-that-clerk-of-complainants-counsel-noted-wrong-date\/","name":"Del HC | Complaint under S. 138 NI Act dismissed for non-prosecution restored considering that clerk of complainant's counsel noted wrong date | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2019-08-23T04:36:53+00:00","dateModified":"2019-08-27T04:55:13+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/23\/del-hc-complaint-under-s-138-ni-act-dismissed-for-non-prosecution-restored-considering-that-clerk-of-complainants-counsel-noted-wrong-date\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/23\/del-hc-complaint-under-s-138-ni-act-dismissed-for-non-prosecution-restored-considering-that-clerk-of-complainants-counsel-noted-wrong-date\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/23\/del-hc-complaint-under-s-138-ni-act-dismissed-for-non-prosecution-restored-considering-that-clerk-of-complainants-counsel-noted-wrong-date\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Del HC | Complaint under S. 138 NI Act dismissed for non-prosecution restored considering that clerk of complainant’s counsel noted wrong date"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":231311,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/06\/24\/dishonour-of-cheque-mp-hc-director-managing-director-joint-director-other-officers-and-employees-of-a-company-can-not-be-prosecuted-under-s-138-of-ni-act-unless-the-company-is-impleaded-as-an-acc\/","url_meta":{"origin":218529,"position":0},"title":"[Dishonour of Cheque] MP HC | Director\/MD\/JD\/other officers and employees of a company can not be prosecuted under S. 138 of NI Act unless the company is impleaded as an accused","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"June 24, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Madhya Pradesh High Court:\u00a0Rajendra Kumar Srivastava, J., while addressing a matter with regard to dishonour of cheque held that, Director\/Managing Director\/Joint Director\/other officers and employees of company can not be prosecuted under Section 138 of NI Act unless the company is impleaded as an accused Petitioner is aggrieved with the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":266662,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/05\/10\/when-no-offence-is-attributable-to-company-it-is-not-possible-to-attach-liability-on-managing-director-section-138-ni-act-dishonour-of-cheque-liability\/","url_meta":{"origin":218529,"position":1},"title":"When no offence is attributable to Company, it is not possible to attach liability on Managing Director by deeming provisions of S. 141 of the NI Act: Del HC","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"May 10, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: Asha Menon, J., held that if no offence is attributed to the company, its Directors and other persons responsible for the conduct of its business cannot be saddled with any liability. The petitioner had filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 against\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Delhi_New-logo.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Delhi_New-logo.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Delhi_New-logo.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Delhi_New-logo.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Delhi_New-logo.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":214465,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/05\/08\/tri-hc-purpose-of-demand-notice-under-s-138-ni-act-not-to-demand-payment-but-to-inform-the-party-of-broken-contract-and-liability-to-pay\/","url_meta":{"origin":218529,"position":2},"title":"Tri HC | Purpose of demand notice under S. 138 NI Act \u2013 not to demand payment, but to inform the party of broken contract and liability to pay","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"May 8, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Tripura High Court: The Bench of Arindam Lodh, J. allowed a revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and set aside the lower courts\u2019 order acquitting the accused in a case filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Petitioner\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":236302,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/09\/25\/all-hc-once-the-intention-of-the-party-is-clear-that-he-does-not-wish-to-make-payment-should-complainant-wait-for-15-days-to-file-a-complaint-for-dishonour-of-cheque-allahabad-hc-answers\/","url_meta":{"origin":218529,"position":3},"title":"All HC | Once the intention of the party is clear that he does not wish to make payment, should complainant wait for 15 days to file a complaint for dishonour of cheque? HC answers","author":"Editor","date":"September 25, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Allahabad High Court: In the instant case where the summoning order issued as per the requisites of Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881, was challenged as being \u2018bad in law\u2019 and the question arose that once the intention of the party is clear that he does not wish to\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":265356,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/04\/12\/dishonour-of-cheque-11\/","url_meta":{"origin":218529,"position":4},"title":"Ori HC considers whether any difference exists between a case where default is committed and prosecution immediately launched and where prosecution is deferred till cheque presented again gets dishonored for second or successive time?","author":"Editor","date":"April 12, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Orissa High Court: R K Pattnaik, J. dismissed the petition and held that the ground on which the petition is raised is misconceived and therefore, cannot be sustained. The facts of the case are such that the\u00a0 petitioner is an accused in a complaint case filed by OP 1 pending\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":364270,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/10\/17\/ori-hc-insolvency-no-defence-for-directors-in-cheque-dishonour\/","url_meta":{"origin":218529,"position":5},"title":"Insolvency proceedings no shield for Directors in cheque dishonour cases under S. 138 NI Act: Orissa HC","author":"Editor","date":"October 17, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cOn the request of the petitioner, the complainant waited and represented the cheque through its banker, but once again it got dishonoured with the same remark - refer to drawer.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Cheque dishonour","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Cheque-dishonour.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Cheque-dishonour.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Cheque-dishonour.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Cheque-dishonour.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/218529","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=218529"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/218529\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=218529"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=218529"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=218529"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}