The appeal challenges a High Court order under Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing a Magistrate's order taking cognizance of an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. (!) (!)

Key issues: (i) Whether cognizance under Section 138 can be taken on a complaint filed before the 15-day period after notice service under Section 138(c) expires; (ii) If not, whether the complainant can refile after the one-month period under Section 142(b) expires. (!) (!) [1000512270017]

Facts: Cheques dishonoured; notice served on 23.09.2008; complaint filed on 07.10.2008 (before 15 days expired); cognizance taken on 14.10.2008. High Court quashed as premature. (!)

Section 138 offence requires three conditions in proviso: (a) cheque presented within validity; (b) notice within 30 days of dishonour info; (c) no payment within 15 days of notice receipt. All must be met for offence. (!) (!) (!)

Section 142: Cognizance only on written complaint by payee/holder within one month from cause of action under Section 138(c); non-obstante clause applies. (!)

Complaint under Section 138 only after cause of action accrues under proviso (c), i.e., after 15 days from notice without payment; pre-accrual complaint is premature and not maintainable. (!) (!)

Even if offence completes by cognizance date, premature complaint is invalid; no cognizance permissible on invalid complaint under Section 142. (!) (!)

There is a conflict in judicial opinions on premature complaints under Section 138, requiring authoritative decision by larger Bench. (!) (!) (!)

Second question (refiling post one-month expiry) arises only if first is negative; may involve proviso to Section 142(b). Matters referred to three-Judge Bench. (!) (!)