Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010202362025 2025:GAU-AS:12497 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./1124/2025 BIJOY KUMAR AGARWAL SON OF SRI SHEO PRASAD AGARWAL, PROPRIETOR AND KARTA OF M/S BIJOY AND SONS, RESIDENT OF D.M. LOHIA ROAD, P.O., P.S. AND DIST. TINSUKIA, ASSAM, PIN-786125. VERSUS SAHID AKHTER PROPRIETOR M/S MADIAN TEXTILE, SARABHATI ROAD, HIJUGURI, P.O., P.S. AND DIST. TINSUKIA, ASSAM, PIN-786125. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. BHASKAR DUTTA, SENIOR ADVOCATE, MS L RONGPIPI,MR JITENDRA DAS,MR. SAILENDRA DEKA Advocate for the Respondent : , BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 10.09.2025 1. Heard Mr. B. Dutta, the learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Mr. S. Deka, the learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. This application under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 has been Page No.# 2/3 filed by the petitioner, namely, Shri Bijoy Kumar Agarwal, praying for an appropriate direction to the Trial Court for expeditious disposal of the NI Case No. 70/2015, pending before the said Court. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner as complainant had filed a complaint under Sections 138/142 of the NI Act, 1881 against the respondent in the year 2015. 4. However, even after lapse of 10(ten) years, since the date of filing of the case is still pending at the stage of cross-examination of complaint witness No. 1. 5. He further submits that the complaint witness was initially examined by the Trial Court on 15.11.2017 and thereafter, he was cross- examined after a gap of 6(six) years on 29.07.2023. 6. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that this is a case where there is a clear violation of the statutory provisions contained in Section 143 (3) of the NI Act, 1881, which mandates that the trial under the provisions of the NI Act, 1881 shall be conducted as expeditiously as possible and all endeavours shall be made to conclude the trial within 6(six) months, from the date of filing of the complaint. However, the Trial Court has failed to comply with the said statutory requirements. 7. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and have gone through the records of the case. It is apparent that the statutory mandate contained in Section 143(3) of the NI Act, 1881 has not been followed, rather it has been violated in conduct of Page No.# 3/3 the trial of the NI Case No. 70/2015, pending before the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Tinsukia. 8. The petitioner has sought for the relief of issuance of direction to the Trial Court for disposal of the aforesaid case as expeditiously as possible within a specified time framed. Considering the nature of the case and nature of relief sought for by the petitioner in this case, the notice to the respondent is dispensed with and this criminal petition is disposed of with a direction to the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Tinsukia to conduct the trial of NI Case No. 70/2015, as expeditiously as possible and to dispose of the said case at the earliest. 9. The learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Tinsukia is directed to send a report regarding compliance of this order to the Registrar General of this Court within a period of 45(forty-five) days from the date of this order. 10. With the above observations, this Criminal Petition is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant