Disposed¶18

Santosh Kumar Singh v. Sankar Paswan

Calcutta HC8 Aug 2025CRR/1715/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Expeditious disposal; Section 138 NI Act; Section 141 NI Act; Negotiable Instruments Act 1881; issuance of process not decided; delay in cheque dishonour complaint; vacancy of Judicial Magistrate post; Judicial Magistrate 3rd Court in charge; four-month timeline from communication of order; C Case No. 241 of 2023; Judicial Magistrate 2nd Court Barrackpore; North 24 Parganas; Lahara P.S.; police report filed 04.10.2024; CRR 1715 of 2025; Calcutta High Court Criminal Revisional Jurisdiction; Jay Sengupta J.; Santosh Kumar Singh v. Sankar Paswan.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the learned Magistrate to consider issuance of process preferably within four months from communication of the order, and thereafter to expedite and conclude the proceeding in accordance with law. ¶18

Santosh Kumar Singh Vs Sankar Paswan — Cheque Dishonour | Calcutta HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶18

Issue for consideration

Whether the learned Magistrate should be directed to decide the question of issuance of process and to expedite conclusion of the pending proceeding under Sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (C Case No. 241 of 2023).

¶10

Court's answer

The proceeding under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act initiated in 2022 had not been concluded, and even the question of issuance of process had not been decided.

¶16

Ratio / Principle

The learned Magistrate, even if in charge, was directed to consider the question of issuance of process at the earliest, preferably within four months from the date of communication of the order.

¶17

Key takeaways

After consideration of issuance of process, the Court was to make all endeavour to expedite the matter and conclude the proceeding in accordance with law.ratio¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

CRR 1715 of 2025 (Jay Sengupta, J.; judgment 08.08.2025), High Court at Calcutta, Criminal Revisional Jurisdiction: Application by Santosh Kumar Singh for expeditious disposal of C Case No. 241 of 2023 under Sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, pending before the Judicial Magistrate, 2nd Court, Barrackpore, North 24 Parganas. Complaint filed in 2022; police report (O.C., Lahara P.S.) called for in January 2023 and filed on 04.10.2024; hearing stalled owing to vacancy of the Court, with the Judicial Magistrate, 3rd Court in charge. Finding the proceeding unconcluded and even issuance of process undecided, the Court disposed of the revisional application, directing the learned Magistrate, even if in charge, to consider the question of issuance of process at the earliest, preferably within four months from communication of the order, and thereafter to expedite and conclude the proceeding in accordance with law.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Criminal Revisional Jurisdiction Appellate Side

¶2

Present:

¶3

The Hon’ble Justice Jay Sengupta

¶4

CRR 1715 of 2025

¶5

Santosh Kumar Singh Vs.

¶6

Sankar Paswan

¶7

For the Petitioner : Mr. Brajesh Jha Mr. Neel Chakraborty Mr. A.G. Sinha

¶8

Heard on : 08.08.2025 Judgment on : 08.08.2025

¶9

Jay Sengupta, J.:

¶10

This is an application praying for expeditious disposal of C Case No. 241 of 2023 under Sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 presently pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, 2^nd Court, Barrackpore, North 24 Parganas.

¶11

Certified copy of order sheet is taken on record.

¶12

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits as follows. Although the petition of complaint was filed in 2022, till date the proceeding could not be concluded. In fact, there was a report called for from the O.C, Lahara P.S. in the January, 2023. It was finally filed before the trial Court on 04.10.2024. Since then the Court could

¶13

¶14

not take up the matter for haring as the same was vacant and the Judicial Magistrate, 3^rd Court was in charge.

¶15

No prejudice will be caused to anyone, if a direction is passed to expedite the proceeding.

¶16

It appears that a proceeding under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act initiated in 2022 has not been concluded. Far less, even the question of issuance of process has not been decided yet.

¶17

In view of the above, let the learned Magistrate, even if he is in charge, consider the question of issuance of process at the earliest, preferably within four months from the date of communication of this order. After that, the Court will make all endeavour to expedite the matter and conclude the proceeding in accordance with law.

¶18

With these observations and directions, the revisional application is disposed of.

¶19

Urgent Photostat certified copy of this judgment be supplied to the parties, if applied for, as early as possible.

¶20

(Jay Sengupta, J.)

¶21

tbsr/383

Santosh Kumar Singh v. Sankar Paswan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Kumar Singh v. Sankar Paswan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Asif Ikbal Mondal Vs State of West Bengal and Anr.

MD Nadim @ MD Nadeem Vs State of West Bengal and Anr.

Nurtaj Khatun Vs State of West Bengal

Santosh Kumar Singh Vs Dhiraj Kumar Shaw and Another

Santosh Kumar Singh Vs Chandra Bhushan Chaudhary

Santosh Kumar Singh Vs Sk. Azharuddin