"Negotiable Instruments Act cases account for 30 to 40 percent trial court pendency:" Supreme Court, Centre mooting committee to devise solution

The Supreme Court on Wednesday strongly pitched the proposal to establish additional courts for tackling the burgeoning pendency of cases under the Negotiable Instruments Act. .In this regard, a Bench of Chief Justice of India SA Bobde, Justices AS Bopanna and V Ramasubramanian adverted to Article 247 of the Constitution which lays down that Parliament may by law provide for the establishment of any additional courts for the better administration of laws. ."At the hearing of this matter, we have suggested that the Union of India may provide for establishment of additional courts for the better administration of laws i.e. the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short, the ‘N.I. Act’) under Article 247 of the Constitution of India," the order passed by the Court on Wednesday recorded. .The top court further stated that there was "no doubt or dispute about the fact that matters under the N.I. Act have posed what by now has become an intractable problem/accounting for close to 30 to 40 per cent of the pendency in the trial courts and a very high percentage in the High Courts also.".The Court was hearing a suo motu case initiated by it to examine measures to ensure expeditious trial of cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act..The Centre, however, opposed the idea of the Court with Additional Solicitor General Vikramjit Banerjee informing the court that Ministry of Finance was not in favour of setting up additional courts. He instead highlighted alternate measures..[Expeditious disposal of Cheque Bouncing cases] 11 High Courts have not responded to Amicus Curiae report: Supreme Court.The Central government in Makwana Mangaldas Tulidas vs State of Gujarat had stated that instead of additional courts "the root cause" could be targeted which was the delay tactics used by accused. It stated that a penalty could be imposed for non-appearence of the accused.In a scenarios in which the accused refuses to receive summons through post or courier, it was suggested that summons should be considered as served and courts should enter appearance of the accused.Centre also proposed to cap the maximum number of hearings so that accused do not use delay tactics..The top court rejected those suggestions stating that they were not "acceptable.""Suffice it to say that having gone through the measures and heard learned counsel on the said measures, we find that the measures are, to say the least, inadequate for the purpose," the Court said..Amici Curiae Siddharth Luthra and K Parameshwar also submitted their suggestions before the Court on measures to tackle delay. These includes solutions touching upon various procedural aspects including service of summons, creation of nodal agency for electronic service of summons, attachment of bank account to the extent of cheque amount, avoiding mechanical conversion of summary trial to summons trial and use of mediation. .To be or not to be: Decriminalising Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.ASG Banerjee submitted that the matter requires wide ranging discussion with various stakeholders and officers and secretaries of various Ministries who will be able to suggest a solution to the problems. .The top court found this suggestion of ASG acceptable and, therefore, directed the government to form a committee to deliberate on measures to reduce pendency.However, the Court stated that it is necessary to have a former judge, who has had wide ranging experience as a trial judge, on the Committee..The matter will be heard again on Thursday when ASG Banerjee is expected to come up with names of persons who could be part of the committee..[Read Order]