The Karnataka High Court has clarified that a complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (NI Act) before the completion of the statutory 15-day notice period is not maintainable in law. However, it has granted liberty to file a fresh complaint within one month, with the delay deemed condoned.
The case revolved around a cheque dishonour complaint filed by Ananda (respondent) against Arumugam (petitioner). The petitioner had borrowed ₹1,00,000 and issued a cheque dated 10.12.2015, which was dishonoured due to insufficient funds on 21.12.2015. A legal notice was served on 01.01.2016, and the complaint was filed on 13.01.2016—before the completion of the mandatory 15-day period from the notice date.
Read Also:- Bike Owners Challenge Karnataka Bike Taxi Ban in High Court, Cite Commuter Impact and Legal Provisions
Arumugam was convicted by the trial court and the conviction was upheld in appeal. He then filed a criminal revision petition before the High Court, arguing that the complaint was premature and thus invalid.
The High Court, led by Justice Shivashankar Amarannavar, examined the legal question in light of precedents and statutory provisions. The Court referred to:
“A complaint filed before expiry of 15 days from the receipt of notice under Section 138(c) of the NI Act is not a complaint in the eye of law and cannot be acted upon.”
Read Also:- Karnataka High Court Urges State to Regulate STPs, Address Manual Scavenging Deaths
This principle was established by the Supreme Court in Yogendra Pratap Singh v. Savitri Pandey (2015), and reaffirmed in Gajanand Burange v. Laxmi Chand Goyal (2022), which the High Court followed. The rulings emphasize that unless the 15-day window given for payment lapses, no offence is deemed committed, and no valid cause of action arises.
The Court held:
“Drawer of the cheque cannot be allowed to escape from prosecution merely on a technical count that a premature complaint was filed against him before expiry of the statutory period of 15 days as per Section 138(c) of N.I. Act.”
Justice Amarannavar emphasized that while the original complaint was invalid, the respondent has the right to file a fresh complaint within one month from the date of the order. The delay will be treated as condoned under the proviso to Section 142(b) of the NI Act. The trial court has been directed to dispose of the complaint expeditiously, preferably within six months.
Read Also:- Karnataka High Court Issues Notice to KSCA, RCB & DNA in Suo Motu Case on Chinnaswamy Stadium Stampede
The judgment modified the earlier orders of conviction and disposal, stating:
“The impugned judgments passed by the trial court and the appellate court are not sustainable in law and are set aside.”
The court further instructed the trial court to return original documents to the complainant after retaining certified copies. Additionally, the amount deposited by the accused will remain in fixed deposit until the case concludes.
Case Title: Arumugam vs. Ananda
Criminal Revision Petition No. 1021 of 2017
