Uttarakhand High Court
C528/1524/2026 of PANKAJ MASON Vs NITIN GUPTA on 20 July 2026
Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures UKHC010123342026 2026:UHC:6048 COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS C528/1524/2026 Pankaj Mason --Applicant Versus Nitin Gupta --Respondent With C528/1525/2026 Pankaj Mason --Applicant Versus
SL.
No.
Date
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
or directions
and Registrar’s
order with
Signatures
UKHC010123342026
2026:UHC:6048
COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
C528/1524/2026
Pankaj Mason
--Applicant
Versus
Nitin Gupta
--Respondent
With
C528/1525/2026
Pankaj Mason
--Applicant
Versus
Purnima Gupta
--Respondent
Hon'ble Rakesh Thapliyal, J.
Mr. M.C. Upadhyay, learned counsel
for the applicant.
2.
Since both the matters involve the
similar controversy, therefore, both the C528
applications are clubbed and are being heard and decided together by this common order.
3.
By the instant petitions, preferred
under Section 528 of BNSS 2023., the
applicant is praying for expeditious disposal of the proceeding of Complaint Case No.4811
of 2022, Pankaj Mason vs. Nitin Gupta and Complaint Case No.4810 of 2022 Pankaj Mason vs. Purnima Gupta, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate III, Dehradun, which is the proceeding initiated under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘N.I.
Act’).
4.
Learned counsel for the applicant
submits that the complaint under Section 138
of the N.I. Act, were preferred on 05.07.2022
and 06.07.2022, and thereafter the learned Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun took cognizance on the complaint and issued summons. The learned counsel for the applicant further submits that since the date cognizance is taken the respondent-accused is adopting a delaying tactics.
5.
Learned counsel for the applicant
placed reliance to Section 143(3) of the N.I.
Act, which reads as under:-
“143.
Power
of
Court
to
try
cases
summarily.—
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
(1) …
(2) …
(3) Every trial under this section shall be conducted as expeditiously as possible and an endeavour shall be made to conclude the trial within six months from the date of filing of the complaint.”
6. As it appears from Section 143 (3) of the N.I. Act, every trial shall be concluded as expeditiously as possible and an endeavour shall be made to conclude the trial within six months from the date of filing of the complaint, whereas in this case, the complaint was filed in the month of August 2022 and the order-sheet of the said complaint case reveals that on number of dates the case was listed, but for one pretext to another, it has been adjourned and has not been decided as yet, and no attempts are being made for expediting this proceeding. This is certainly against the mandate of Section 143(3) of the N.I. Act. Therefore, I direct the Court concerned to expedite the proceeding of Complaint Case No.4811 of 2022, Pankaj Mason vs. Nitin Gupta and Complaint Case No.4810 of 2022 Pankaj Mason vs. Purnima Gupta, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate III, Dehradun, under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, as early as possible preferably within nine months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
7. In view of the observation and direction, as above, both the C-528 petitions are disposed of accordingly.
(Rakesh Thapliyal, J.) 20.07.2026 Arti