Sr. No. 43 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CRM(M) 203/2024 CrlM(517/2024) DEEPAK BAINA …Petitioner(s)/appellant(s) Through: Mr. Jahangeer, Advocate. Vs. TAHIR AHMAD AND ANR. ...Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Faisal, Advocate. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE O R D E R 28-07-2026 1. The petitioner, through the medium of present petition, has challenged the orders dated 22.11.2022 and 17.06.2023, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, (2nd Additional Munsiff), Srinagar, in a complaint filed by respondent No. 1 against the petitioner and respondent No. 2 alleging commission of an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 2. Vide impugned order dated 22.11.2022, the learned trial Magistrate has condoned the delay in filing the complaint, whereas, vide impugned order dated 17.6.2023, process has been issued against the petitioner and the co-accused. 3. Heard and considered. 4. The only grievance that has been projected by the petitioner for challenging the impugned orders is that, before condoning the delay in filing the complaint, the learned trial Magistrate has not issued any notice to the petitioner, thereby infringing his right of hearing, which is an important aspect of the principles of natural justice. 5. It has been submitted that once there was delay in filing the complaint on the part of the respondent No. 1, a right had accrued in favor of the petitioner, which could not have been taken away without hearing him. 6. There appears to be merit in the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner. A bare perusal of the impugned order dated 22.11.2022 passed by trial Magistrate would reveal that the delay in filing the complaint has been condoned without issuing notice to the petitioner/accused, and without hearing him. The impugned order is, therefore, not sustainable in law. 7. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 22.11.2022 passed by learned trial Magistrate is set aside. Consequently, the order dated 17.6.2023, whereby process has been issued against the petitioner, shall also stand set aside. The case is remanded to the learned trial Magistrate with a direction to proceed further in the matter in accordance with law. It is further directed that the learned trial Magistrate shall hear the petitioner before considering the application of respondent No. 1/complainant seeking condonation of delay in filing the complaint. The petition is, accordingly, disposed of. 8. A copy of this order be sent to learned trial Magistrate. (SANJAY DHAR) JUDGE SRINAGAR 28-07-2026 Junaid