Disposed

Surendra Jain S/O Prakash Chand Jain v. Ashok Kumar S/O Banwari Lal

Rajasthan HC17 Jul 2025CRLMP/3416/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged the trial court's order upholding an interim compensation award under Section 138 NI Act. The High Court declined to interfere, noting that Section 143A of the NI Act provides mechanisms for recovery, and disposed of the petitions with liberty to the petitioner to file applications regarding interim compensation.

What did the court decide?

Petitions disposed of with liberty to petitioner to file appropriate applications for securing interim compensation amount if succeeded.

Surendra Jain S/O Prakash Chand Jain Vs Ashok Kumar S/O… — Cheque Dishonour | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:26814]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 3404/2025

¶4

Surendra Jain S/o Prakash Chand Jain, R/o 17-18 Adarsh Nagar, Bundi Road,near Riddhi Siddhi Nagar, Kunhari Kota, District Kota , Raj. Proprietor M/s Arihant Explotech, Head Office 17, 18 Adarsh Nagar, Bundi Road,near Riddhi Siddhi Nagar,kunhari Kota, Dist. Kota, Raj.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

Jagmal Singh S/o Partaram, R/o Kaali Pahari,tehsil Neemrana, Dist. Alwar (Raj).

¶8

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

Connected with

¶11

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 3416/2025

¶12

Surendra Jain S/o Prakash Chand Jain, Aged About 99 Years, R/o 17-18 Adarsh Nagar, Bundi Road, Near Riddhi Siddhi Nagar, Kunhari Kota, District Kota Raj. Proprietor M/s Arihant Explotech, Head Office 17, 18 Adarsh Nagar, Bundi Road, Near Riddhi Siddhi Nagar, Kunhari Kota, Dist. Kota, Raj.

¶13

----Petitioner

¶14

Versus

¶15

Ashok Kumar S/o Banwari Lal, R/o Village Kalipahari, Tehsil Neemrana District Alwar, Raj.

¶16

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.

¶17

----Respondents

¶18

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 3436/2025

¶19

Surendra Jain S/o Prakash Chand Jain, R/o 17-18 Adarsh Nagar, Bundi Road, Near Riddhi Siddhi Nagar, Kunhari Kota, District Kota Raj. Proprietor M/s Arihant Explotech, Head Office 17, 18 Adarsh Nagar, Bundi Road, Near Riddhi Siddhi Nagar, Kunhari Kota, Dist. Kota, Raj.

¶20

----Petitioner

¶21

Versus

¶22

Firm Nishat Construction Company, H-45 Riico Indusrial Area Shahjahanpur Tehsil Neemrana Dist. Alwar, Rajasthan Through Partner Girish Kumar S/o Niranjanlal R/o Village Beejwad Chouhan, Tehsil Mundawar, Dist. Alwar (Raj).

¶23

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.

¶24

----Respondents

¶25

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 3437/2025

¶26

(2 of 3) [CRLMP-3404/2025]

[2025:RJ-JP:26814]

----Petitioner

Versus

¶31

Jagmal Singh S/o Partaram, R/o Kaali Pahari, Tehsil Neemrana, Dist. Alwar, Raj.

¶32

The State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.

¶33

----Respondents

¶34

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 3438/2025

¶35

¶36

----Petitioner

¶37

Versus

¶38

Jagmal Singh S/o Partaram, R/o Kaali Pahari, Tehsil Neemrana, Dist. Alwar, Raj.

¶39

State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.

¶40

----Respondents

¶41

For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Harshita Sharma for Dr. Mahesh Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. M. S. Shekhawat, PP

¶42

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN

¶43

Judgment

¶44

17/07/2025

¶45

The present petitions have been filed under Section 528 BNSS seeking directions for quashing the order dated 21.11.2023 passed by learned trial Court, whereby, learned trial Court has upheld the order dated 15.03.2022 passed under Section 138 Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881, whereby application filed by the

[2025:RJ-JP:26814]

[CRLMP-3404/2025]

(3 of 3)

petitioner under Sections 204, 195 r/w 340 Cr.P.C has been dismissed and application filed by complainant has been allowed for deposition of 20% cheque amount as interim compensation of Rs. 4 Lacs qua the three employees.

¶50

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that upon deposition of 20% amount to the complainant, who were exemployees, nothing will be left for recovery qua the fraud committed by the ex-employees.

¶51

Considering the foregoing facts and circumstances of the case, this Court has noted that under the provisions of Section 143A of NI Act, mechanism qua recovery are specified. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned orders. Howsoever, it is made clear that petitioner is at liberty to file an appropriate application seeking directions for securing interim compensation amount, if petitioner succeeds in the present matters, and concerned Court is directed to pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, if they deems it appropriate.

¶52

In above terms, present petitions are disposed of.

¶53

It is made clear that no prejudice be caused to either of the parties on account of the present order.

¶54

Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.

¶55

(SAMEER JAIN),J

¶56

Pooja /32,35-38

Surendra Jain S/O Prakash Chand Jain v. Ashok Kumar S/O Banwari Lal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surendra Jain S/O Prakash Chand Jain v. Ashok Kumar S/O Banwari Lal

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

Kaptan Kushwaha S/O Shri Chandra Bhan Vs State of Rajasthan

Premraj S/O Surjan Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Mahendra S/O Shri Mukhram Ghasal Vs the State of Rajasthan

Lalit Kumar Meena Son of Shri Jagdish Prasad Meena, Vs State of Rajasthan

Wasim Khan S/O Salim, Vs State of Rajasthan

Aaram Singh Urf Aarami Son of Nanguram, Vs State of Rajasthan