9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Validity of the complaint under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 2. Interpretation of the proviso to section 138 and section 142 of the Act. Detailed Analysis: The judgment by the High Court of Madras involved a petition filed under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to quash a complaint in C.C. No. 15 of 1993. The complaint was made against the petitioner for an offense under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The complaint alleged that the accused issued a cheque that was dishonored twice, and the complainant demanded repayment. The accused failed to make the payment, leading to the complaint being filed. The main argument raised was regarding the timing of the complaint in relation to the statutory notice sent to the accused. The petitioner's counsel argued that the complaint was invalid as it was made within fifteen days of the statutory notice, which rendered it liable to be quashed. The court analyzed the relevant provisions of the Act, specifically clause (c) of the proviso to section 138 and clause (b) of section 142. It was noted that the cause of action for a complaint under section 138 arises only after fifteen days from the date of the statutory notice. Since the complaint was filed before the expiry of the fifteen days, it was considered premature and, therefore, invalid. The court emphasized that as per the provisions of the Act, the cause of action for a complaint under section 138 arises only after the expiration of fifteen days from the date of the statutory notice. Since the complaint was filed before this period, it was deemed premature and, therefore, not maintainable. Consequently, the petition was allowed, and all further proceedings in C.C. No. 15 of 1993 were quashed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate in Krishnagiri.
|
