Crl.RC.No.452 of 2020

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 08.06.2023

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE Dr. JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN

Crl.R.C.No.452 of 2020

P.Sekar

....

Petitioner/Appellant/Complainant

Vs

G.Manohar

....

Respondent/Respondent/Accused

Prayer: Criminal Revision Case filed under Sections 397 r/w 401 of Cr.P.C.,

to set aside the order dated 21.08.2019 passed by the XVIII Additional

Sessions Judge, Chennai, in Crl.A.No.68 of 2019, confirming the order of the

Fast Track Court, Magistrate Level – I, Egmore at Allikulam passed in

C.C.No.945 of 2015 dated 07.01.2019 and convict the respondent/accused in

accordance with law.

For Petitioner

:

Mr.S.T.Varadarajulu

For Respondent

:

No appearance

***

ORDER

This Criminal Revision Case is filed challenging the concurrent

findings of the Courts below dismissing the private complaint filed under

Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.RC.No.452 of 2020

2. The vital point involved in this case is that whether the private

complaint, without the signature of the complainant and his counsel, can be

treated as a complaint in the eye of law. Though the complaint was dismissed

not only on the ground that the written complaint was not signed by the

complainant and his counsel, but also on the other grounds that the complaint

is bereft of details like where the advance amount of Rs.3 lakhs was given and

where and when the cheques marked as Ex.P2 to P4 were issued to discharge

the existing liability.

3. For the sake of disposal of the revision petition, it is suffice to

look into the law whether a private complaint, without signature, can be

entertained.

4. As far as the Code of Criminal Procedure is concerned, Section

154 states that every information relating to the commission of a cognizable

offence, if given orally to an officer in charge of a police station, shall be

reduced to writing by him or under his direction, and read over to the

informant and every such information, whether given in writing or reduced to

writing, shall be signed by the person giving it. As far as the private complaint

presented before the Court, Section 200 of Cr.PC says, Magistrate is

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.RC.No.452 of 2020

competent to take cognizance of an offence on complaint and the witnesses

present, if any, provided the complaint is made in writing.

5. Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act deals with the

complaint regarding dishonour of cheque for insufficiency etc., of the fund in

the account. Whereas Section 142 deals with the cognizance of the offence

which states that notwithstanding anything containing in the Code of Criminal

Procedure, no Court shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under

Section 138, except upon a complaint, in writing, made by the payee or, as the

case may be, the holder in due course to the cheque.

6. The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner

submitted that the complaint in writing but not signed by the complainant is a

curable defect. The Court has taken cognizance of the offence not solely based

on the complaint, but after taking the sworn statement of the complainant.

Therefore, the complaint cannot be dismissed on the ground that the

complainant has not signed the complaint.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.RC.No.452 of 2020

7. This Court, after giving anxious consideration to the provisions

of the law, referred above, find that, the Code of Criminal Procedure states that

the complaint must be reduced in writing and signed by the complainant.

However, Section 142 starts with non obstante clause “notwithstanding

anything containing in the Code”. Therefore, it is clear that under Section 142

of Negotiable Instrument Act, Court can take cognizance of the complaint and

no condition in the Section 142 that the said complaint must be signed by the

complainant.

8