Supreme Court grants revision petition, emphasizes witness summoning, timely compliance in NI Act cases

The Supreme Court set aside the order of the Special Judge, Tis Hazari Courts, allowing the petitioner's revision petition. The petitioner was granted the opportunity to cross-examine the complainant's witness under Section 145(2) of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Emphasizing the mandatory nature of summoning witnesses, the court directed efficient completion of the process and imposed costs on the petitioner. The judgment underscored the necessity of timely compliance with procedural requirements to ensure expeditious resolution of cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

---

---

Issues:
Petition against order of Special Judge, Tis Hazari Courts; Dismissal on ground of limitation and merits; Opportunity to file application under Section 145(2) N.I. Act; Abolishment of trial court and transfer to another Metropolitan Magistrate; Closure of right to cross-examine complainant's witness; Recall of NBWs; Application under Section 145(2) N.I. Act declined; Prayer for one opportunity to cross-examine; Interpretation of Section 145(2) N.I. Act; Supreme Court judgments in Mandvi Cooperative Bank Limited and Indian Bank Association; Setting aside impugned order; Costs imposed on petitioner; Granting opportunity to cross-examine complainant.

Analysis:
The petition was filed against the order of the Special Judge, Tis Hazari Courts, which dismissed the revision petition on the grounds of limitation and merits. The petitioner, involved in a proceeding under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, claimed trial defense stating that the cheques were security cheques not returned. The petitioner sought to file an application under Section 145(2) N.I. Act, with the trial court granting opportunities but later closing the right to cross-examine the complainant's witness due to procedural issues arising from court transfers and strike calls. The petitioner, unaware of the court transfer, faced challenges in complying with procedural requirements. The court referred to Supreme Court judgments in Mandvi Cooperative Bank Limited and Indian Bank Association, emphasizing the mandatory nature of summoning witnesses under Section 145(2) N.I. Act.

The court noted that the trial court should have allowed the petitioner's application under Section 145(2) N.I. Act based on the legal precedents and the case's circumstances. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the petition was allowed, subject to the petitioner paying costs. The petitioner was granted the opportunity to cross-examine the complainant or any other witness, with a directive to complete the process efficiently. The petitioner's application under Section 145(2) N.I. Act was allowed, ensuring a fair chance for cross-examination. The court emphasized the need for timely and efficient handling of cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, in line with the directives provided by the Supreme Court in Indian Bank Association.

In conclusion, the court disposed of the petition, instructing the trial court to adhere to the directives and ensure proper communication of the order. The judgment highlighted the importance of following procedural requirements diligently to facilitate the expeditious disposal of cases falling under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

---