Complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is invalid if filed before the mandatory 15-day period post-notice. The court cannot take cognizance until that period has elapsed.

ORDER :

P. DHANABAL, J.

This Criminal original petition has been filed by the petitioner to quash the proceedings in C.C. No.1291 of 2021 pending on the file of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Fast Track Court No.III, Saidapet, Chennai.

2. According to the petitioner, the respondent filed a cheque complaint against him stating that the complainant and the respondent are doing business in Gold and Diamond jewels. The complainant supplied dianond bangles worth about Rs.2,57,454/- to the petitioner on 28.03.2019 along with invoice and the petitioner herein gave four cheques as security in favour of the complainant. Out of 4 cheques, last 3 cheques were honoured and encashed. The first cheque dated 21.04.2019 issued for a sum of Rs.80,000/- was presented for 3 times and the same was dishonoured. For that cheque alone, the above said case was filed. The cheque in dispute is dated 21.04.2019 for a sum of Rs.80,000/-. Return memo is dated 18.02.2019. Legal notice is dated 25.07.2019 and acknowledgement is dated 29.07.2019. Complaint was dated 31.07.2019. The compliant was filed on 01.08.2019. The complaint must have been filed as per the provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act only after 14.08.2019, i.e., after 15 days from the date of receipt of legal notice. But the present complaint was filed, prematurely on 01.08.2019, without following the statutory limitation stated in the Act. Therefore, the complaint is not in accordance with law. Further, the complainant is a partnership firm and the complaint was filed by one of the partners with authorization dated 19.03.2021. But the complaint was filed on 01.08.2019. Therefore, on the date of filing of complaint, no valid authorization was given to the complainant to file this complaint. Therefore, without following the mandatory procedures, the complaint has been lodged and the trial Court has failed to consider the above said facts. Therefore, the pending proceedures are liable to be quashed as against this petitioner.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would contend that the respondent has lodged the complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act as against the petitioner alleging that there is a business transaction between them, for that he gave 4 cheques, that already three cheques have been encashed and the last cheque dated 21.04.2019 for Rs.80,000/- presented for collection and the same was returned, thereafter the notice was issued on 25.07.2019, acknowledgement card is dated 29.07.2019, complaint was dated 31.07.2019. The complaint was filed on 01.08.2019. The complaint was ought to have been filed 14.08.2019, i.e., after 15 days from the date of receipt of a legal notice. Therefore, the complaint is premature and the same cannot taken on file and there is no any offence committed by the petitioner under the N.I. Act.

3.1. In support of his contention, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has relied upon the following judgments:

V.G. Srinivasan vs. D. Srinivasalu reported in 2021 (1) MWN (Crl) DCC 79 (Mad).

4. There is no representation on the side of respondent. Already this Court issued notice to the respondent. Even after the receipt of the notice, there is no representation on the side of the respondent. The name of the respondent also printed in the cause list. But, there is no representation. Therefore, this Court heard the petitioner's side, perused the available records and passed the order.

5. According to the petitioner, the respondent has filed a cheque complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and the trial Court, without considering that the complaint is prematured and no offence is made out, has ta