RAVI VERMA vs JITENDER SAPRA

Judgment text excerpt

$~66 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 24th April, 2026 + CRL.M.C. 2030/2026 & CRL.M.A. 8359/2026 RAVI VERMA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Divye Chugh with Ms. Priya Wadhwa, Mr. Angel Bhardwaj, Mr. Hazel Bhardwaj, Mr. Rachit Raushan, Advocates. versus JITENDER SAPRA .....Respondent Through: Mr. B.S. Jakhar with Mr. Vikram Singh Jakhar, Ms. Bhawna Jakhar, Mr. Neeraj Jakhar, Mr. Shubham Dabas, Mr. Viraj Rathee, Ms. Nidhi Jakhar, Mr. Harris Mudgal, Ms. Aastha Gautam, Advocates for respondent No.2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1. When the present matter was taken up by this Court on 19.03.2026, the following facts were recorded:- “1. Petitioner has been summoned for commission of offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. When the abovesaid complaint, before taking cognizance, was taken up by the learned Trial Court on 15.09.2025, the accused, as the legal position existed during that time, appeared and apprised that part payment had, in fact, been made during notice period itself. Learned Trial Court took note of the abovesaid fact and fixed up the matter for orders but when the order was passed on 31.10.2025, the accused was summoned without taking note of the abovesaid material aspect of part payment. It is submitted that there was delay in lodging the complaint and accused was also heard on condonation of delay and while condoning the delay, the accused was summoned without taking notice of the abovesaid fact of part payment. Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 2030/2026 1 Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Date:25.04.2026 16:45:07 2. It is submitted that if a material fact is suppressed, then concerned party cannot be permitted to seek justice from the Court. 3. Reliance is placed upon