Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
The Supreme Court in effect of the two judgments, G.J.Raja vs. Tejraj Surana and Surinder Singh Deswal @ Col. S.S. Deswal vs. Virender Gandhi upheld the view that Section 143A of the Negotiable Instruments Act has no retrospective effect whereas the Section 148 will apply to the pending appeals pending on date of enforcement of this provision. Both these provisions were introduced last year by an amendment to the Negotiable Instruments Act. Section 143A gives power to the Trial Court to direct the accused to 'pay' an interim compensation which cannot be more than 20% of the 'cheque amount'. Section 148 of the NI Act, empowers the Appellate Court to direct the accused/appellant to 'deposit' minimum of 20% of 'fine' or 'compensation' awarded by the Trial Court. Prior to insertion of Section 143A in the Act, there was no provision on the statute book where-under even before the pronouncement of the guilt of an accused, or even before his conviction for the offence in question, he could be made to pay or deposit interim compensation. The bench also referred to the principles enunciated in Hitendra Vishnu Thakur vs. State of Maharashtra. Applying these principles, the court observed, Sec 143A has two dimensions
Thus, this section not only creates a new disability or an obligation but also exposes the accused to coercive methods of recovery of such interim compensation.
86540
103860
630
114
59824