The Single Judge held that the issue of whether the accused issued the cheque must be adjudicated during trial and cannot be considered during the summary inquiry under section 143-A of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
Four weeks time granted to deposit the amount; Writ Petition disposed of in these terms.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
4-crwp2128-2022.doc
VRJ
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.2128 OF 2022
Asad Khan Yasin Khan… Petitioner
V/s.
Mohammad Yakub Barkatullah & Anr.… Respondents
Mr. J.D. Khairnar for the petitioner.
Ms. Tooba R. Momin i/by Mr. R.M. Momin for the
respondent No.1.
Mr. A.R. Patil, APP for the State.
CORAM:AMIT BORKAR, J.
DATED:NOVEMBER 18, 2022
P.C.:
1.The order impugned is passed in exercise of powers under
section 143-A of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. By the
impugned order the learned Magistrate has directed to the accused
to deposit 20% of the amount of cheque.
2.The contention raised on behalf of the petitioner is that the
banker had handed over the cheque in question to the
complainant. The cheque was not issued by the accused. In my
opinion, the said issue is the question which has to be adjudicated
by the time of trial. The inquiry under section 143 being summary
in nature andconsidering the scope and purpose of scheme of
sections 141 to 143 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, in my
opinion, the defence of the applicant that the cheque in question
1
4-crwp2128-2022.doc
was issued by the petitioner to the complainant and not to the
accused cannot be considered at this stage.
3.In that view of the matter, the exercise of powers by the
learned Magistrate under Section 143(A) directing the accused to
deposit 20% of amount of the cheque cannot be faulted. There is
no perversity or miscarriage of justice.
4. At this stage, the learned advocate for the petitioner seeks four (4) weeks time to deposit the amount. The period as prayed for is granted.
5. Writ petition is disposed of in above terms. No Costs.
(AMIT BORKAR, J.)
2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the defence that the cheque was issued by the petitioner and not the accused can be raised during the summary inquiry under section 143-A.
Whether the Magistrate's order directing deposit of 20% of the cheque amount suffers from perversity or miscarriage of justice.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Asad Khan Yasin Khan
Mohammad Yakub Barkatullah
Respondent No.2
Amit Borkar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court