38.6c New Delhi, India, Monday, August 25, 2025
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Judiciary

Section 138 NI Act: Delay In Instituting The Complaint Can Be Condoned If Sufficient Cause Is Shown In The Complaint: SC

By LawStreet News Network      15 May, 2019 12:00 AM      0 Comments
Section 138 NI Act: Delay In Instituting The Complaint Can Be Condoned If Sufficient Cause Is Shown In The Complaint: SC

The Supreme Court on May 8, 2019, in the case of Birendra Prasad Sah v. State of Bihar has observed that cognizance of a complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881, can be taken by the court after the prescribed period, if the complainant satisfies the Court that he had sufficient cause for not making a complaint within such period.

A Bench comprising of Justice D.Y. Chandrachud and Justice Hemant Gupta was hearing an appeal filed against the judgment passed by the Patna High Court wherein the Court had quashed a summons issued by Chief Judicial Magistrate in a cheque bounce complaint.

In this case, the complainant issued a legal notice on December 31, 2015, intimating the dishonour of the cheque. As the accused failed to reply, a second legal notice was issued on February 26, 2016, by the complainant. The accused replied to the second notice on March 2, 2016. Thereafter, the complaint was filed on May 11, 2016. The delay in filing complaint was condoned by the CJM taking into consideration the request made by the complainant that during the intervening period he had fallen ill.

However, the Patna High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, quashed the summons on the ground that the complaint under Section 138 was not filed within the statutory period of thirty days prescribed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881.

In appeal, the Bench observed that sufficient cause was shown by the complainant for condoning the delay in instituting the complaint taking the basis of the complaint as the issuance of the first legal notice dated December 31, 2015.

The Bench said that "The complaint was instituted on 11 May 2016. Under Section 142(1), a complaint has to be instituted within one month of the date on which the cause of action has arisen under clause (c) of the proviso to Section 138. The proviso however stipulates that cognizance of the complaint may be taken by the court after the prescribed period, if the complainant satisfies the Court that he had sufficient cause for not making a complaint within such period. Both in paragraphs 7 and 8 of the complaint, the appellant indicated adequate and sufficient reasons for not being able to institute the complaint within the stipulated period. These have been adverted to above. The CJM condoned the delay on the cause which was shown by the appellant for the period commencing from 6 April 2018. However, if paragraphs 7 and 8 of the complaint are read together, it is evident that the appellant had indicated sufficient cause for seeking condonation of the delay in the institution of the complaint. The High Court has merely adverted to the presumption that the first notice would be deemed to have been served if it was dispatched in the ordinary course. Even if that presumption applies, we are of the view that sufficient cause was shown by the appellant for condoning the delay in instituting the complaint taking the basis of the complaint as the issuance of the first legal notice dated 31 December 2015."

Accordingly, the Bench allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment passed by the Patna High Court.

Read the judgment below.



Share this article:

User Avatar
About:


Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS

sc-restores-mandatory-20-percent-deposit-for-suspension-of-sentence-in-cheque-bounce-case
Trending Judiciary
SC Restores Mandatory 20% Deposit for Suspension of Sentence in Cheque Bounce Case [Read Order]

SC sets aside P&H HC order; rules 20% deposit mandatory for suspension of sentence in ₹8.65 crore cheque bounce case under NI Act.

25 August, 2025 12:35 PM
18-former-judges-write-to-union-home-minister-amit-shah-criticizing-his-remarks-on-justice-b-sudershan-reddy
Trending Judiciary
18 Former Judges write to Union Home Minister Amit Shah, criticizing his remarks on Justice B Sudershan Reddy

18 ex-judges write to Union HM Amit Shah, criticizing his remarks on Justice B Sudershan Reddy, stressing judicial independence and dignity.

25 August, 2025 03:09 PM

TOP STORIES

sc-dismisses-plea-by-aap-mp-sanjay-singh-against-up-govts
Trending Judiciary
SC dismisses plea by AAP MP Sanjay Singh against UP govt's decision to 'close' 105 primary schools

SC dismisses AAP MP Sanjay Singh’s plea against UP govt decision to close 105 primary schools; directs him to approach Allahabad HC.

19 August, 2025 11:02 AM
sc-grants-bail-to-ex-wb-minister-in-teachers-recruitment-scam
Trending Judiciary
SC grants bail to ex WB Minister in teachers recruitment scam

SC grants bail to ex-WB Minister Partha Chatterjee in teachers’ recruitment scam, citing long incarceration; directs speedy trial in pending cases.

19 August, 2025 11:15 AM
calcutta-hc-grants-injunction-to-captain-gogo-trademark-owner-against-multiple-infringers
Trending Judiciary
CALCUTTA HC GRANTS INJUNCTION TO ‘CAPTAIN GOGO’ TRADEMARK OWNER AGAINST MULTIPLE INFRINGERS [Read Order]

Calcutta HC grants injunction to Moondust Paper Pvt Ltd, protecting its ‘Captain Gogo’ trademark against multiple infringers in smoking products.

19 August, 2025 11:20 AM
himachal-pradesh-hc-grants-pre-arrest-bail-to-industrialist-in-intimidation-case
Trending Judiciary
Himachal Pradesh HC Grants Pre-Arrest Bail to Industrialist in Intimidation Case [Read Order]

Himachal Pradesh HC grants pre-arrest bail to industrialist accused of intimidating pollution officer, says allegations don’t amount to stalking under BNS.

19 August, 2025 11:52 AM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email