Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
The Apex Court in its recent order has observed that cognizance of a complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act can be taken by the court even after the prescribed period, if the complainant satisfies the Court that he had sufficient cause for not making a complaint within such period. The division bench in the present matter was concerned with an appeal against Patna High Court judgment which quashed a summons issued by Chief Judicial Magistrate in a cheque bounce complaint.
In present matter after dishonour of cheques, the complainant issued a legal notice on 31.12.2015. As the accused failed to reply, the reminder notice was issued on 26.02.2016 by the complainant. The accused replied to the second notice denying his liability. The complaint was filed on 11.05.2016. 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 on the contrary, The High Court had quashed the summons mainly on the ground that it was not permissible for a payee to create another cause of action in respect of the same cheque. It also observed that the complainant failed to file the complaint within the statutory period of thirty days as prescribed under the N.I. Act.
The bench in the present matter observed that sufficient cause was shown by the complainant for condoning the delay in instituting the complaint. By setting aside the High Court order on this ground, the bench said: " 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. We are of the view that sufficient cause was shown by the appellant for condoning the delay in instituting the complaint”.
86540
103860
630
114
59824