TMI Blog2020 (12) TMI 430X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of Surinder Singh Deswal @ Colonel S.S.Deswal Others Vs. Virender Gandhi [ 2019 (5) TMI 1626 - SUPREME COURT ], the question before the Hon'ble Apex Court was with reference to Section 148 of the N.I. Act which has been amended and inserted w.e.f. 1.9.2018 and Section 148 of the N.I. Act is applicable to appeals against the order of conviction for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act even where the complaints under Section 138 of the N.I. Act were filed prior to amendment of the N.I. Act. In that light, the Hon'ble Apex Court has given effect by holding that the appellant has to deposit a sum which is not less than 20% of the fine or compensation amount - But in the said decision Section 143A of the N.I. Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6/2018 dated 7.9.2018 have been confirmed by dismissing the Criminal Revision Petitions. 2. I have heard Sri B.K. Manjunath, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners-accused and Sri Dinesh Gaonkar, learned counsel for the respondent- complainant. 3. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners-accused that complainant filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 ('N.I. Act' for short). After recording of the sworn statement, the learned Magistrate directed the petitioners-accused to deposit of 20% of the cheque amount of ₹ 6,00,000/- as an interim compensation within 60 days as contemplated under Section 143A of the N.I. Act. Being aggrieved by the same, the accused- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... said order of the trial Court. On these grounds, he prayed to allow the petitions. 4. Per contra, it is the submission of the learned counsel for the respondent-complainant that the insertion incorporated goes to the original legislation and it is not an amendment, but it is an insertion and as such the effect has to be given from the original date when the enactment has been made. It is his further submission that the case under Section 138 of the N.I. Act is a summary trial and the Court cannot go into the deep root of the case and cannot interpret other way. It is his further submission that there are divergent views by the various High Courts with regard to interpretation of the provision of Section 143A of the N.I. Act. It is his fu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act even where the complaints under Section 138 of the N.I. Act were filed prior to amendment of the N.I. Act. In that light, the Hon'ble Apex Court has given effect by holding that the appellant has to deposit a sum which is not less than 20% of the fine or compensation amount. But in the said decision Section 143A of the N.I. Act has not been interpreted. But in the case of G.J.Raja Vs. Tejraj Surana (cited supra), the issue came up before the Court directly with regard to interpretation of Section 143A of the N.I. Act and the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that Section 143A of the N.I. Act is having prospective effect in nature and confined to the cases where the offences were co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
