Bombay High Court
VIVEK MADANLAL JAINversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The High Court partially allowed the writ petition and directed the magistrate to decide the pending complaint within six months.
Summary
The petitioner, Vivek Madanlal Jain, filed a writ petition alleging that a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (CC No. 4253/SS/2008) pending before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 47th Court, Mumbai, had been delayed for about 26 years despite a 2014 order directing a two‑month disposal. The High Court noted that such prolonged pendency defeats the purpose of expeditious disposal of criminal matters and violates the right to a speedy trial. Relying on the earlier order and the principle of timely justice, the Court partially allowed the petition and directed the magistrate to decide the complaint within six months of receipt of the order. The writ petition was thereafter disposed.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate remedy for a criminal complaint pending for an inordinate period despite a prior court direction for speedy disposal?
Legislation cited
- Negotiable Instruments Act — s. 138
Subjects
- speedy trial
- Section 138 NI Act
- criminal procedure
- writ petition
- expeditious disposal
Judgment
24-WP-3247-2022 (CR).doc
Tikam
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CR. WRIT PETITION NO. 3247 OF 2022
Vivek Madanlal Jain ...Petitioner/s
VAISHALI VERSUS
ANIL State Of Maharashtra And Anr ...Respondent/s
TIKAM
_________________________________________________________________
Digitally signed
by VAISHALI
ANIL TIKAM Mr. Pritam Runwal a/w. Mr. Anil Khopde, Advocate for Petitioner.
Date:
2026.09.11 Mr. B.B. Kulkarni, APP for Respondent-State.
18:07:04 +0530
_________________________________________________________________
CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
DATE : 9th SEPTEMBER, 2026.
P.C. :
1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner.
2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is
the complainant and he has filed a complaint being CC No. 4253/SS/2008
under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, which is pending
before the Learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 47 th Court,
Esplanade, Mumbai.
3. This Court by order dated 24/09/2014 [Coram: M.L.
Tahaliyani, J.] had earlier expedited the trial and had directed to decide
the matter within a period of two months. However, the said order has not
been complied with and complaint has been pending for around 26 years.
Despite the said direction, the pendency of the matter for such a long
period is a matter of serious concern and defeats the very purpose of
Page 1 of 2
24-WP-3247-2022 (CR).doc
Tikam
expeditious disposal of the proceedings.
4. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the
Petitioner, I pass following order:
ORDER
(i) Petition is partly allowed.
(ii) The Learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 47 th
Court, Esplanade, Mumbai, shall decide the pending complaint being CC
No. 4253/SS/2008 as early as possible, preferably within six months from
the date of receipt of this order as complaint is pending for last 26 years.
(iii) Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.
(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)
Page 2 of 2
Checking your session…