Disposed

Banojamanjari Das v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC9 Jul 2026CRLMC/238/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged a trial court order under Section 143-A NI Act directing deposit of 15% of cheque amount as interim compensation in a Section 138 complaint. She undertook to comply if Rs.4,00,000 deposited before this Court were released. The Court permitted withdrawal and disposal of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Permission to withdraw Rs.4,00,000 deposited before the High Court; petitioner to deposit 15% (Rs.90,000) before trial court; trial to proceed.

Banojamanjari Das Vs State of Odisha — Cheque Dishonour | Orissa HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMC No.238 of 2025

¶2

Banojamanjari Das

¶3

..…... Petitioner (s) Mr. Hemanta Ku. Tripathy, Adv.

¶4

-Versus-

¶5

State of Odisha & Anr.

¶6

……. Opposite Party (s) Mr. Arun Kumar Das-1 (O.P.2)

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

DR. JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI

ORDER

09.07.2026

Order No.

This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement.

¶14

Heard.

¶15

The Petitioner has challenged the order dated 24.10.2024 passed in connection with 1.C.C. Case No.151 of 2022, whereby while allowing the application under Section 143-A of the N.I. Act, the learned trial Court directed the Petitioner to deposit 15% of the cheque amount. He is aggrieved by the same and has approached this Court by filing the present petition.

¶16

Signature Not Verified

¶17

Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMU Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 10-Jul-2026 19:28:10

¶18

The brief facts of the case is that, the Opposite Party No.2 and the Petitioner known to each other very well having familiar relationship between them. The Petitioner being in urgent need of money for her daughter's marriage, requested the Opposite Party No.2 for a hand loan of Rs.6,00,000/- (Six lakhs) and the said amount was paid to the Petitioner in the month of April 2022. On

¶19

Page 1 of 4

¶20

the same date, the Petitioner had promised to return the said money after the marriage ceremony of her daughter. However, after the marriage of her daughter, when the Opposite Party No.2 requested the Petitioner to refund the said amount, the Petitioner avoided to refund the same. Again the Opposite Party No.2 requested for payment of his money. However, on 30.08.2022, the Petitioner came to the Opposite Party No.2 and handed over a cheque of Rs.6 Lakhs bearing Cheque No.496863 of State Bank of India, Mahisapat ADB, Dhenkanal Branch. When the Opposite Party No.2 deposited the said cheque in the Bank, the said cheque was returned unpaid on 16.09.2022 with a cheque return memo with an endorsement showing "Payment Stopped by the Drawer". On 07.10.2022 the Opposite Party No.2 issued a Demand Notice through his Advocate for payment of the cheque amount within 15 days. When the Petitioner failed to make the payment within 15 days, the Opposite Party No.2 was constrained to file a complaint case against the Petitioner under Section 138 of N.I. Act before the court of learned S.D.J.M., Dhenkanal for realization of the said cheque amount. Hence, this case.

¶21

Signature Not Verified

¶22

Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMU Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 10-Jul-2026 19:28:10

¶23

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Opposite Party No.2 had filed an application under Section 143-A of the Negotiable Instruments Act seeking interim compensation to the

¶24

Page 2 of 4

¶25

extent of 20% of the cheque amount before the learned trial Court. The Petitioner filed his objection to the said application. Upon consideration of the objection, the learned S.D.J.M., Dhenkanal, vide order dated 24.10.2024 passed in I.C.C. Case No.151 of 2022, directed the Petitioner to pay 15% of the cheque amount as interim compensation, failing which proceedings under Section 143-A(5) of the Negotiable Instruments Act would be initiated against him. Aggrieved thereby, the Petitioner has approached this Court seeking quashing of the order dated 24.10.2024 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Dhenkanal in I.C.C. Case No.151 of 2022.

¶26

Learned counsel for the Petitioner further contends that the Petitioner is ready and willing to comply with the order dated 24.10.2024 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Dhenkanal in 1.C.C. Case No.151 of 2022, if the amount of Rs.4,00,000/- deposited before this Court pursuant to the order dated 29.01.2025 passed by this Court be released in his favor.

¶27

Learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2 submits that the Opposite Party No.2 has filed the complaint case against the Petitioner, as the above mentioned cheque was dishonoured by the bank for insufficient funds. He further submits that the Petitioner is liable to pay a sum of Rs.6,00,000/- but he has failed to honour the amount.

¶28

Signature Not Verified

¶29

Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMU Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 10-Jul-2026 19:28:10

¶30

Page 3 of 4

¶31

In such view of the matter and considering the submission made by the learned counsel for both the parties, this Court is of the view that since the Petitioner is ready and willing to comply with the order dated 24.10.2024 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Dhenkanal in 1.C.C. Case No.151 of 2022, the Petitioner shall be permitted to withdraw the sum of Rs.4,00,000/- which has been deposited by the Petitioner before the Registry of this Court. Upon such withdrawal, the Petitioner shall comply with the aforesaid order by depositing 15% of the cheque amount, i.e., Rs.90,000/-, before the learned S.D.J.M., Dhenkanal. Thereafter, the learned trial Court shall proceed with the matter in accordance with law and make an endeavour to conclude the trial at the earliest possible.

¶32

Accordingly, the CRLMC is disposed of.

¶33

¶34

( Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi) Judge

¶35

Murmu

¶36

Signature Not Verified

¶37

Digitally Signed Signed by: LITARAM MURMU Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 10-Jul-2026 19:28:10

¶38

Page 4 of 4

Banojamanjari Das v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Banojamanjari Das v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tankadhar Sethi Vs State of Odisha

Manas Rout Vs State of Odisha

Prasanna Sahoo @ Prasanna Kumar Sahoo Vs State of Odisha

Bhabani Sankar Baral Vs State of Odisha

Gyanaranjan Pradhan @ Jogi Vs State of Odisha

Damayanti Satapathy Vs State of Odisha