IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc. Application No.664 of 2007 (U/s 482 Cr.P.C.) Ashok Kumar Malhotra ……. Petitioner Versus Soran Singh ..…. Respondent Dated: July 26, 2012 Hon’ble Servesh Kumar Gupta , J. Mr. S.K. Shandilya, Advocate, for the petitioner. None has turned up on behalf of the opposite party even in the revised call after lunch. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, it appears that the respondent Soran Singh filed a complaint case no.29 of 2007, Soran Singh Vs. A.K. Malhotra under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter to be referred as the Act) on 2.1.2007 for dishonour of cheque, which was handed over to him by the petitioner A.K. Malhotra worth Rs.35,000/-. Petitioner had issued said cheque to the respondent in discharge of his debt liabilities. However, the Bank dishonoured the said cheque on account of insufficiency of funds. Though the date has not been mentioned as to when the respondent received the cheque back, but it appears that he issued the notice on 3.10.2006 to the petitioner which was allegedly received by him on 11.10.2006. In response to that notice, petitioner did not make the payment, so this complaint was filed on 2.1.2007. Since the same was barred by limitation for two months, the respondent also moved an application before the Magistrate that because of his illness, the doctor had advised him rest since 13.10.2006 to 1.1.2007, hence the delay in filing the complaint may be condoned. 2 It appears that learned Magistrate has passed the impugned order of cognizance without making any order regarding the condonation of delay, much less rendering an opportunity to the prospective accused to resist the application for condonation of delay. So, the impugned order of cognizance dated 17.1.2007 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar is apparently wrong and thus, the same is hereby quashed. However, it is made clear that the proceedings of the complaint case no.29 of 2007, titled above, are not quashed and the learned Magistrate will hear the prospective accused first on the delay condonation application and after hearing both the parties, he will be free to proceed in accordance with law. Let a copy of this order be sent to the court below to proceed in accordance with law. (Servesh Kumar Gupta, J.) 26.07.2012 Rdang