04 Regular IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CRM(M) 587/2026 CrlM(1360/2026) MOHAMMAD AMIN DAR ….. Petitioner(s) Through: Ms. Madiya Mushtaq, Advocate. vice Mr. Shuja ul Haq, Advocate. V/s SHEIKH TAJAMUL ISLAM ….. Respondent(s) Through: Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Dhar, Judge ORDER (Oral) 10.08.2026 1. The petitioner, through the medium of present petition has challenged order dated 27.03.2026, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class (Munsiff) Dangiwacha whereby in a complaint filed by the respondent against the petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the learned trial Magistrate has exercised its powers under Section 143A of the Negotiable Instruments Act and directed the petitioner to deposit an amount of Rs. 80,000/- constituting 20% of the cheque amount as an interim compensation in favour of the petitioner. 2. Heard and considered. P a g e | 2 CRM(M) 587/2026 CrlM(1360/2026) 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has raised a plausible defence to the complaint inasmuch as in the cross examination, the respondent/complainant has admitted that after dishonour of the cheque, he has received an amount of Rs. 50,000/- from the petitioner and that only an amount of Rs. 1.00 lac is covered under the cheque which is subject matter of the complaint whereas rest of Rs. 3.00 lacs represent the compensation amount. 4. Without going into the correctness of the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner with regard to repayment of part of the cheque amount by the petitioner to the respondent, one thing is clear that the respondent/complainant during his cross examination has stated that Rs. 1.00 lac out of the cheque amount is still outstanding in respect of the principal sum. Even if the said statement is to be read against the respondent still then the amount of interim compensation which has been granted in favour of the respondent is less than the amount which, as per the petitioner’s own case, is due from him to the respondent. 5. As per provisions of Section 143 A of Negotiable Instruments Act, a Magistrate has the discretion of passing order of interim P a g e | 3 CRM(M) 587/2026 CrlM(1360/2026) compensation in favour of a complainant to the maximum extent of 20% of the cheque amount. The contention of the petitioner as regards the admission of the respondent/complainant made in his cross examination, has been taken into account by the learned trial Magistrate, while passing the impugned order whereafter he has exercised the discretion to award interim compensation to the respondent. The discretion exercised by the learned Magistrate does not call for any interference in the facts and circumstances of the case. 6. Therefore, I do not find any merit in the petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. . (Sanjay Dhar) Judge SRINAGAR 10.08.2026 Aasif