Criminal Petition No. 101514 of 2025 (Ashok vs. Fayaz Aahmad) decided by the Karnataka High Court

 

Criminal Petition No. 101514 of 2025 (Ashok vs. Fayaz Aahmad) decided by the Karnataka High Court:

---

⚖️ Case Summary

• Petitioner: Ashok, challenging the Magistrate’s cognizance in a cheque-bounce (Section 138 NI Act) complaint filed by Fayaz Aahmad.

• Respondent: Fayaz Aahmad (complainant under NI Act).

• Court: Karnataka High Court – Hon’ble Justice Shivashankar Amarannavar.

• Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 172 casemine.com+3livelaw.in+3livelaw.in+3.

---

📌 Legal Issue

Whether a Magistrate must afford the accused an opportunity to be heard under Section 223 of the BNSS Act before taking cognizance of a complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

---

🔍 Court Findings

• The court clarified that for complaints under Section 138 NI Act, the special procedural mechanism overrides general BNSS provisions.

• As a result, Magistrates are not required to give the accused prior hearing under Section 223 BNSS before taking cognizance in such cases livelaw.in+1livelaw.in+1.

---

✒️ Final Outcome

• The petition by Ashok was dismissed.

• The Magistrate’s order taking cognizance without issuing notice to Ashok was upheld as legally valid.

---

📌 Practical Implication

This ruling reaffirms that in cheque-bounce cases (Sec. 138 NI Act), the summary procedure is strictly followed, and accused persons do not receive a prior hearing before the Magistrate takes cognizance, even though Section 223 of the BNSS Act suggests it in more general offences.