Jammu & Kashmir High Court
Kuldeep Raj vs Rajinder Kumar on 15 July, 2026
S. No. 176
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT JAMMU
CRM(M) No. 692/2026
CrlM No. 1241/2026
Kuldeep Raj .....Petitioner(s)
Through: Mr. Aman Bhagotra, Advocate
Vs
Rajinder Kumar ..... Respondent(s)
Through:
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, JUDGE
ORDER
(15.07.2026)
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to
an order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1 st Class, Sunderbani in
a complaint titled “Rajinder Kumar vs Kuldeep Raj“. It has been
vehemently argued by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner that the learned Magistrate has fell in error of law by allowing
15% of the cheque amount by way of interim compensation without any
cogent reason or justifiable cause and the order impugned according to the
learned counsel is liable to be set aside on this ground alone in absence of
any cogent reason for awarding 15% of the cheque amount.
2. The learned counsel with a view to fortify his claim has placed reliance
upon the judgment passed by the Srinagar Bench of this Court in case titled
” Nargees Javed vs Ghulam Jeelani Nengroo”, decided on 20.04.2026, a
perusal whereof reveals that in the similar facts and circumstances of the
case, this Court has already quashed the order impugned in the aforesaid
case dated 16.03.2026 passed by the Court of learned Special Mobile
Magistrate, Pulwama by holding that the discretionary power under Section
143-A of the Negotiable Instruments Act must be exercised on well-
recognized principles and duly supported by a reason and a duty is cast
upon the learned trial Court to spell out the reasons for grant of interim
compensation in favour of the complainant and the Court has to justify in
2 CRM(M) No. 692/2026
its order with reasons the quantum of interim compensation that is being
awarded by it, as the said quantum can vary from 1% to 20% of the cheque
amount. The learned counsel relying upon the aforesaid principle, has
drawn the attention of the Court to the impugned order dated 07.05.2026
passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Sunderbani by virtue of
which the learned trial Court has granted interim compensation @ 15% of
the cheque amount but without assigning any cogent reason which was the
statutory compulsion in terms of the aforesaid statutory provisions i.e
Section 143-A of the Negotiable Instruments Act, which for facility of
reference is reproduced as under:
“143A. Power to direct interim compensation.–(1)
Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973, the Court trying an offence under section 138
may order the drawer of the cheque to pay interim compensation
to the complainant–
(a) in a summary trial or a summons case, where he pleads
not guilty to the accusation made in the complaint; and
(b) in any other case, upon framing of charge.
(2) The interim compensation under sub-section (1) shall not
exceed twenty per cent. of the amount of the cheque.
(3) The interim compensation shall be paid within sixty days
from the date of the order under subsection (1), or within such
further period not exceeding thirty days as may be directed by
the Court on sufficient cause being shown by the drawer of the
cheque.
(4) If the drawer of the cheque is acquitted, the Court shall direct
the complainant to repay to the drawer the amount of interim
compensation, with interest at the bank rate as published by the
Reserve Bank of India, prevalent at the beginning of the relevant
financial year, within sixty days from the date of the order, or
within such further period not exceeding thirty days as may be
directed by the Court on sufficient cause being shown by the
complainant.
(5) The interim compensation payable under this section may be
recovered as if it were a fine under section 421 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974).
3 CRM(M) No. 692/2026
(6) The amount of fine imposed under section 138 or the amount
of compensation awarded under section 357 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), shall be reduced by the
amount paid or recovered as interim compensation under this
section.”
3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner at length and perused the record.
4. A prima facie case for indulgence is made out.
5. Issue notice to the respondent returnable within four weeks, subject to
taking of steps for service within one week.
6. Registry is directed to summon the scanned record from the Court of
learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Sunderbani.
7. List this matter on 18.08.2026.
8. In the meantime, subject to objections from other side and till next date of
hearing before the Bench, the order impugned dated 07.05.2026 passed by
the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Sunderbani in complaint titled
“Rajinder Kumar vs Kuldeep Raj“, shall remain stayed.
9. Alteration/modification on motion.
(WASIM SADIQ NARGAL)
JUDGE
JAMMU
15.07.2026
Vijay
Vijay Kumar
2026.07.15 17.25
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
