RAJEEV GUPTA Vs. PREM SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant criminal revision petition stands directed against the impugned order(s) pronounced, on 14.07.2016, by the learned Magistrate concerned, upon a complainant instituted before, him, under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, whereby he ordered for issuance of summons in vis-vis the accused.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended with vigour, that, the summoning order is jurisdictionally vitiated, it, begetting infraction(s) of the mandate of Section 138(c) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, provision whereof stand(s) extracted hereinafter:

(3.) The learned counsel for the respondent has relied, upon, a judgement of this Court reported in rendered in case titled as Rattan Chand vs. Kanwar Ram Kripal and another, 2009 1 LatestHLJ 649 (H.P.) AND upon a verdict reported in titled as Jaram Singh vs. Joginder Singh Parmar, 2010 1 LatestHLJ 51 (H.P) "AND" submits (i) that with the complainant concerned in consonance with the mandate borne therein rather on the day succeeding, the endorsement, made, by the Postal agency concerned proceeding, to institute the complaint (ii) AND the Magistrate concerned, entertaining, the complaint, whereas, even if the complaint was presentable only upon expiry of 15 days, since the evident service of statutory service, upon the accused, (iii) hence renders any cognizance taken by the Magistrate concerned to be hence not jurisdictionally vitiated. The aforesaid submission carries immense weight given (iv) it being therein expressly postulated, of, vis-vis institution of complaints, before, expiry of a period of 15 days, since evident service of statutory notice upon the accused rather not warranting its dismissal, (iv) rather, the Magistrate concerned postponing the taking of cognizance. Thereupon, the counsel for the respondent contends, that, with cognizance being evidently taken upon the complaint, in the month of July, hence, renders the taking of cognizance thereon to fall in tandem therewith especially when hence more than 15 days expired, since the institution of the complaint.