GINNI GARMENTS Vs. SETHI GARMENTS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Order shall dispose of a bunch of 14 petitions, challenging the Orders passed by the Trial Courts in the trials under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881(hereinafter referred to as'the Act'), whereby the Trial Courts have ordered the accused/petitioners to pay 20% or less of the cheque amount to the complainant under Sec. 143-A of the Act, as well as the petitions challenging the Orders passed by the Appellate Courts directing the convicts/appellants/petitioners herein to deposit 20% or more of amount of fine or compensation awarded by the Trial Court, during the pendency of the appeal, by exercising powers under Sec. 148 of the Act. CRM-M-13039-2019,CRM-M-13892-2019,CRM-M-14462- 2019 CRR-9872-2018 are the petitions wherein the Orders passed by the Trial Court under Sec. 143-A of the Act are under challenge and the CRM-M-49024-2018, CRM-M-49216-2018, CRM-M-49054-2018, CRM- M-49055-2018, CRM-M-49182-2018, CRM-M-12625-2019, CRM-M- 15297-2019, CRM-M-61716-2018, CRR-721-2019, CRR-746-2019 are the petitions where in the Orders passed by the Appellate Court under Sec. 148 of the Act are under challenge. It deserves to be noted that there is no dispute on facts of the case in either of the petitions. The Orders have been impugned in all these petitions only on purely legal ground that under Sec. 143-A and Sec. 148 of the Act, the Courts below cannot be deemed to have any authority, retrospectively, to pass the Order imposing the liability of payment of the amounts, mentioned in the impugned orders, in the pending trial or in the pending appeals. Another aspect which deserves to be clarified at the outset is that the Orders impugned in these petitions have been passed by the Courts below by virtue of the powers conferred under Sec. 143-A of the Act during the trial, and under Sec. 148 of the Act during the pendency of appeal. Both these Sec. were not in existence in the Act earlier. Both these Sec. were added vide Amendment No.20 of 2018. In none of the petitions, the vires of these provisions are under challenge. Hence, this Court is proceeding on the presumption that the Sec. introduced by the Amendment Act, are validly operating law. The only challenge raised by the respective petitioners, in all these petitions, is that since the Amendment Act has been enforced with effect from 2/8/2018, therefore, these provisions cannot be made applicable to the cases, where the trials for offence under Sec. 138 of the Act were already pending or where the appeals have arisen from such trials, which were pending on the date of the enforcement of these provisions. Hence, in essence, the grounds for challenge, in all the petitions, is that applying these provisions to the cases already pending before the Courts would tantamount to giving these provisions retrospective operation, although, the Amendment Act does not prescribe for retrospectivity in application of these provisions. Hence these provisions have to be taken as applicable only prospectively, to the cases which arise after introduction of these provisions.

(2.) Before proceeding further, it is apposite to take note of the provisions, which have been introduced by Sec. 143-A and Sec. 148 of the Act, which are as reproduced herein below:-

(3.) Provided that the amount payable under this sub-sec. shall be in addition to any interim compensation paid by the appellant under Sec. 143A.