PIYUSH BHARAT SAINI Vs. PARAS GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Whether the rigors of amended provisions of Section 202 Cr.P.C, laying down a requirement of holding an enquiry, where the person sought to be summoned is outside the jurisdiction of the Court, would apply in the cases of offences under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short, "the Act"), is an important issue arising in this bunch of Criminal Misc. Petitions filed by the petitioner.

(2.) The petitioner in these cases has challenged the summoning order primarily on the ground that his summoning was ordered in these cases without holding an enquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C and hence, prayer is made for quashing of the said summoning order impugned in these different Criminal Misc. M Nos.5325, 5326 and 5327 of 2012 (Piyush Bharat Saini Vs. Paras Gupta), 15609 of 2012 (Peeyush Bharat Saini Vs. Pran Bhayana) and 23724 of 2012 (Peeyoosh Bharat Saini Vs. Raksha Singhal).

(3.) This Court in the case of S.K.Bhowmik Vs. S.K.Arora and another, 2007 4 RCR(Cri) 650, has held the provisions of Section 202 Cr.P.C. to be mandatory and, thus, has viewed that for summoning a person accused in the complaint without holding enquiry, as envisaged under Section 202 Cr.P.C., would be violative of the amended provisions of Section 202 Cr.P.C. The petitioner has, thus, relied upon the ratio of this judgement to plead quashing of the summoning orders on this ground in the abovesaid petitions. It is now to be examined if the rigors of amended provisions of Section 202 Cr.P.C. would apply in the case of offences under Section 138 of the Act as well.