AJAY NAHTA Vs. RAKESH K. JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) - This petition has been filed against the order dated 22.7.2006 whereby the application filed under Sec. 143 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for de-novo trial was rejected.

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor.

(3.) The main contention of the present petitioner is that a petition under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was pending and trial was commenced and the statement of complainant was recorded by the then Presiding Officer, who has been transferred. After then, an application under Sec. 143 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was moved for de novo trial, which was rejected. It has been submitted the learned counsel for the petitioner that under Sec. 143 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, it was obligatory on the concerned Magistrate to try the case summarily or order otherwise and when no otherwise order was passed, it should be treated as summary trial and when the Presiding Officer has been changed, then de novo trial was must. He has placed reliance on the judgment delivered in Prakash Chand vs. State of Rajasthan, 1991 CrLR (Raj.) 446 , which is in regard to Essential Commodities Act, where the provisions are to try all the offences under the Act in summary way.