Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal in Cheque Dishonour Case -- Delay in Filing Complaint Condoned as Bonafide -- Cognizance Taken Under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act Upheld Despite Procedural Irregularity

Nature of Litigation: Criminal appeal challenging the High Court order that upheld the cognizance taken in a cheque dishonour case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881

Remedy Sought

The appellant sought quashing of the complaint under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, arguing that cognizance was taken without first condoning the delay in filing the complaint

Filing Reason

The respondent filed a complaint alleging dishonour of a cheque for ₹5,40,000 issued by the appellant, with the complaint presented two days late due to the respondent's viral fever

Previous Decisions

The Magistrate took cognizance on 09.10.2013 without condoning the delay, later condoned the delay on 30.10.2018, and the High Court rejected the appellant's petition on 28.06.2024, upholding the cognizance and condonation of delay

Issues

Whether cognizance taken without first condoning the delay in filing a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 vitiates the proceedings Whether the delay in filing the complaint was bonafide and properly condoned by the Magistrate

Submissions/Arguments

The appellant argued that the Magistrate lacked jurisdiction to take cognizance before condoning the delay, violating statutory procedures under the NI Act The appellant contended that the delay was sixteen days, not two days, and the condonation was without jurisdiction The respondent argued that the delay was two days and bonafide due to viral fever, and the irregularity in cognizance was curable under the proviso to Section 142(1)(b) of the NI Act

Ratio Decidendi

Taking cognizance before condoning delay in a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is a curable irregularity if the delay is subsequently condoned -- The proviso to Section 142(1)(b) of the NI Act empowers courts to take cognizance of belated complaints upon showing sufficient cause -- Delay in filing a complaint can be condoned if it is bonafide, and such condonation cures any prior procedural irregularity in taking cognizance

Judgment Excerpts

The learned Judge held that, if cognizance is taken without the delay in the presentation of the complaint being condoned, it would only be a curable irregularity -- Para 8 The learned Judge observed that the legislature had conferred express power on the Court to take cognizance even in respect of a belated complaint, if sufficient cause for such belated presentation was established by the complainant -- Para 7 The learned Judge affirmed the condonation of that delay by the learned Magistrate and upheld the cognisance taken, though it was irregular, observing that the said irregularity stood cured on the delay being condoned -- Para 9

Procedural History

The respondent filed complaint PCR No. 3144 of 2013 on 09.10.2013 with a two-day delay -- The Magistrate took cognizance on 09.10.2013 without condoning the delay -- On 23.05.2014, the Magistrate noted the delay and granted liberty to contest it at trial -- On 30.10.2018, the Magistrate condoned the delay after considering a medical certificate -- The appellant filed Criminal Petition No. 9119 of 2018 in the High Court on 06.12.2018 -- The High Court rejected the petition on 28.06.2024 -- The Supreme Court granted leave and heard the appeal, dismissing it on 27.01.2026