Delhi High Court:\u00a0<\/strong>Suresh Kumar Kait, J., dismissed a criminal petition wherein the petitioner sought quashing of the summoning order passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate and also the criminal complaint under Section 138 read with 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.<\/p>\n
The petitioner represented by Ehraz Zafar, Akash Tyagi and Sataya Anand, Advocates, submitted that the complaint in question was filed on 2-5-2013, however, the cognizance was taken by the court by issuing summons against the petitioner on 17-04-2017. The punishment under Section 138 is two years and the cognizance taken by the trial court is after more than four years. It was contended that, therefore, the complaint was liable to be rejected.<\/p>\n
At the outset, the High Court noted the fact remains that the instant was not the case of a warrant. The complaint was filed under Section 138 NI Act which is a summary trial. Relying on the Supreme Court decision in\u00a0Indra Kumar Patodia v. Reliance Industries Ltd.,\u00a0<\/em>(2012) 13 SCC 1,<\/a> the High Court held that,\u00a0The limitation provided under Section 468 is not applicable,<\/strong><\/p>\n
In such view of the matter, the Court did not find any merit in the instant petition and, therefore, dismissed the same. [Uma Kant Umesh v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2019 SCC OnLine Del 10754<\/b><\/a>, decided on 22-10-2019]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"