2022 (11) TMI 143

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Mr. Nilesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during the pendency of this petition, the learned court has taken cognizance vide order dated 13.05.2022 and that is why it was necessitated to file this I.A. 4. Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, learned senior counsel appearing for opposite party no. 2 submits that there is no illegality in the cognizance order. He further submits that he has got no serious objection if the I.A. is allowed. 5. In view of the above facts and considering that during the pendency of this petition, cognizance has been taken and to avoid multiplicity of litigation, the prayer made in the said I.A. is allowed. 6. Accordingly, I.A. No. 8428 of 2022 stands disposed of. 7. Let this I.A. be treated as part of th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rther submits that Section 406, 420 of the I.P.C. is not attracted. 11. Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, learned senior counsel appearing for opposite party no. 2 submits that the amount in question has not been paid and therefore FIR has been lodged. He further submits that the learned court has rightly taken cognizance against the petitioner and there is no illegality in the cognizance order and, therefore, at this stage this Court may not entertain this petition. 12. In view of the above submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, it transpires that Section of the I.P.C. is not attracted in a case where subject matter of the case is arising out of N.I. Act. and this aspect of the matter is being considered by the larger Bench of th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... satisfies the court that he had sufficient cause for not making a complaint within the prescribed period of one month, a complaint may be taken by the court after the prescribed period. Now, since our answer to Question (i) is in the negative, we observe that the payee or the holder in due course of the cheque may file a fresh complaint within one month from the date of decision in the criminal case and, in that event, delay in filing the complaint will be treated as having been condoned under the proviso to clause (b) of Section 142 of the NI Act. This direction shall be deemed to be applicable to all such pending cases where the complaint does not proceed further in view of our answer to Question (i). As we have already held that a compl....