The Uttarakhand High Court issued a direction to the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-III, Dehradun, to conclude the NI Act trial expeditiously, emphasizing the statutory obligation under Section 143(3) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 to finish proceedings within six months of filing the complaint.
Background & Facts
The Dispute
The applicant, Manish Shrivastava, sought expeditious disposal of a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI Act) filed against Shri Banke Bihari Mineral Water & others, pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-III, Dehradun (Complaint Case No.7034 of 2023).
Key Facts
- The complaint under Section 138 NI Act was filed on 01.11.2023.
- The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-III, Dehradun took cognizance and issued summons thereafter.
- The applicant alleges that since cognizance the respondent-accused has adopted delaying tactics, resulting in repeated adjournments.
- Section 143(3) of the NI Act mandates that every trial under this section be conducted as expeditiously as possible and an endeavour be made to conclude the trial within six months from the date of filing of the complaint.
- The order-sheet shows numerous dates of listing but only adjournments on various pretexts, with no attempt to expedite the proceeding.
Procedural History
- 01.11.2023: Complaint under Section 138 NI Act filed (Complaint Case No.7034/2023).
- Date of cognizance and issuance of summons: not specified but subsequent to 01.11.2023.
- Repeated adjournments occurred after cognizance, delaying trial.
- 29.09.2026: Present application (C-528/2062/2026) filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) praying for expeditious disposal.
- 29.09.2026: Judgment delivered by Hon’ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J., Uttarakhand High Court.
Relief Sought
The applicant prayed for a direction to the trial court to expedite the proceedings and conclude the trial within six months from the date of production of a certified copy of the order.
The Legal Issue
The core question was whether the trial court is bound by the statutory mandate in Section 143(3) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 to conclude NI Act proceedings within six months from the date of filing the complaint, and whether persistent adjournments without justification warrant a direction from the High Court under Section 528 BNSS to expedite the trial.
Arguments Presented
For the Applicant/Petitioner
The applicant relied on the express language of Section 143(3) NI Act, arguing that the legislature intended a strict six-month timeline for NI Act trials to prevent harassment of the accused through delay. It contended that the repeated adjournments on flimsy pretexts violated this mandate and that the High Court, under Section 528 BNSS, could issue a direction to ensure compliance.
For the Respondent/State
No counter-arguments were advanced by the respondent; the record shows no appearance or written submission on behalf of Shri Banke Bihari Mineral Water & others.
The Court's Analysis
The Court began by noting that Section 143(3) NI Act is not merely directory but imposes a positive duty on the trial court to conduct the trial expeditiously and to endeavour to conclude it within six months from the complaint date. It observed that the object of the provision is to prevent undue delay that defeats the purpose of summary trial under the NI Act.
The Court quoted the statutory provision:
"As per the mandate of Section 143 (3) of the N.I. Act , every trial shall be conducted as expeditiously as possible and an endeavour shall be made to conclude the trial within six months from the date of filing of the complaint."
It then examined the order-sheet and found that, despite the complaint being filed in November 2023, the case had been listed on multiple dates only to be adjourned on one pretext or another, with no genuine attempt to expedite. This pattern, the Court held, clearly contravened the statutory mandate.
The Court further noted that Section 528 BNSS empowers the High Court to issue directions for expeditious disposal of proceedings pending before subordinate courts. Applying this power, the Court directed the trial court to proceed with the trial as early as possible and, preferably, to conclude it within six months from the date of production of a certified copy of the present order.
The analysis concluded that the direction was necessary to uphold the legislative intent behind Section 143(3) NI Act and to prevent misuse of the judicial process through dilatory tactics.
The Verdict
The applicant succeeded. The Court directed the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-III, Dehradun to expedite the trial of Complaint Case No.7034/2023 and to endeavour to conclude it within six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, dated 29.09.2026. The instant application (C-528/2062/2026) was disposed of finally.
What This Means For Similar Cases
Statutory Timelines Are Binding
Practitioners must remember that Section 143(3) NI Act creates a mandatory six-month window for conclusion of NI Act trials; mere adjournments without valid cause constitute a breach of this duty.
Remedy for Delay Lies Under Section 528 BNSS
Where a trial court fails to observe the statutory timeline, the aggrieved party may seek a direction from the High Court under Section 528 BNSS to expedite proceedings, as demonstrated in this judgment.
Monitoring the Order-Sheet Is Essential
Counsel should diligently track the trial court’s order-sheet; persistent adjournments on flimsy grounds can be promptly challenged before the High Court to secure a direction for expeditious disposal.
