Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:57424 Court No. - 73 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 12992 of 2025 Applicant :- Amit Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Manju Shukla/Ojha,Sheel Kumar Ojha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Sri Sheel Kumar Ojha, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Vikas Sharma, learned State Law Officer for the State/opposite party no.1. 2. This application under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicant to stay the further proceedings in Criminal Case No. 17549 of 2023, under Section 143 N.I. Act, Police Station Ali Nagar, District Chandauli, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Chandauli. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that a complaint stood lodged by the opposite party no.2 against the applicant on 17.3.2020 relatable to the dishonouring of a cheque of Rs.14,40,000/- He has further submitted that during the pendency of the said proceedings an application under Section 143A of the N.I. Act stood preferred by the opposite party no.2 on 27.3.2024 with a prayer that the opposite party no.2 be accorded 20% of the compensation of amount of Rs.14,00,000/- to which the applicant claims to have submitted his objection whereby various grounds were taken regarding non-applicability of the penal provisions under Section 138 of the N.I. Act and also lodging of an FIR by one Shahid Khan, against the applicant. 4. Submission is that by virtue of the order dated 18.2.2025 the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Chandauli in Case No.17549 of 2023 has proceeded to accord interim compensation to the tune of 10% out of the amount of Rs.14,00,000/- being 1,40,000/-. Further submission is that virtually there has been no consideration to the objection so sought to be raised by the applicant to the application under Section 143A of the N.I. Act preferred by the applicant. 5. Argument is that once certain objections are being sought to be raised then they have to be decided this way or that way and the same cannot be skipped particularly when monetary liability is being sought to be fastened and an opportunity is being accorded to the accused to prefer objection. Further argument is that the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rakesh Ranjan Srivastava vs. State of Jharkhand 2024 INSC 205 had the occasion to consider the extent and the import of the Section 143A of the N.I. Act according to which there are certain parameters laid down according to which the Magistrate is not obliged to conduct a mini trial but he has to prima facie satisfy and a satisfaction is to be accorded whether the complainant is entitled to monetary compensation as claimed or not that too after considering the objections of the accused and also in case interim compensation is to be accorded then various factors including the nature of the transaction the position of the parties and financial distress is also to be sick. 6. Learned AGA has though supported the order but could not dispute the fact that the order which is being impugned in the present proceedings passed under Section 143A of the N.I. Act is not in conformity and consonance with the guidelines so sought to be laid down in the case of Rakesh Ranjan Srivastava (Supra). 7. Having heard the submissions so made accross the bar, the sole question arises is the extent of judicial intervention at this stage in the present proceedings. Apparently, a complaint stood lodged under Section 138 of the N.I. Act by the opposite party no.2 against the applicant relatable to the dishonouring of a cheque of Rs14,40,000/- thereafter an application under Section 143A of the N.I. Act stood preferred by the opposite party no.2 wherein 20% of the interim compensation of the total amount of Rs.14,00,000/- was sought. 8. To such an application, the applicant submitted his detailed objection, however, the Court finds that though certain objections have been noticed but they have not been considered. Apart from the same, the exercise ought to have been undertaken by the Magistrate in terms of the guidelines so sought to be enunciated in the case of Rakesh Ranjan Srivastava (Supra).The said exercise is lacking. There has been no consideration in correct perspective with regard to prima facie case and also the financial distress along with the other coupled factors. 9. Accordingly, the application is allowed. The order dated 18.2.2025 passed in Complaint Case No.17549 of 2023, Imran Khan Vs. Amit Kumar is set aside. The matter is remitted back to the court below to pass a fresh order with most expedition. In order to facilitate expeditious disposal of the proceedings the applicant who is represented through his counsel is to furnish the certified copy of the order by 2.5.2022. Order Date :- 18.4.2025 piyush Digitally signed by :- PIYUSH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad