Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
References:- ["Mohd Afzal Beigh vs Noor Hussain - Jammu and Kashmir"]- ["Anil Kumar Niraj Son of Hare Ram Jha VS State of Bihar through Principal Secretary Home Department - Patna"]- ["Kunal Kiritbhai Patel vs State Of Gujarat - Gujarat"]- ["Northern India Paint Colour And Varnish Co. LLP VS Sushil Chaudhary - Delhi"]- ["Anakka Yasodhara Raju vs STATE OF AP - Andhra Pradesh"]- ["Makwana Mangaldas Tulsidas VS State of Gujarat - Supreme Court"]- ["Ashok VS Fayaz Aahmad - Crimes"]- ["NEETI SHARMA vs SARANJIT SINGH - Delhi"]- ["KARAN TAAZ vs STATE OF HARYANA - Punjab and Haryana"]- ["Ajay Prakash Mishra VS State of U. P. - Allahabad"]- ["ASHOK S/O. SIDDAPPA BANKAR vs FAYAZ AAHMAD S/O. AURANGZEB NAIKAR - Karnataka"]- ["Saji John, S/o Late Shri Tk Ulahannan vs Assistant Director, Directorate Of Enforcement - 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 2316"]- ["Tutu Ghosh vs Enforcement Directorate - Calcutta"]- ["Bhupendra Choudhury, S/o. Lt. Bholanath Choudhury vs Arun Choudhury - Gauhati"]- ["Sanjabij Tari VS Kishore S. Borcar - Supreme Court"]- ["Kaberi Dey vs Sourav Bhattacharjee - Calcutta"]- ["Prempal vs State Of U.P. - Allahabad"]- ["SATENDRA KUMAR GUPTA vs State of U.P. AND ANOTHER - Allahabad"]
Cheque bounce cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI Act) are among the most common financial disputes in India. When a cheque is dishonoured due to insufficient funds or other reasons, the payee often files a complaint, leading to swift judicial action. But a key question arises: in cheque bounce cases, is there no need to summon at pre-cognizance stage under BNSS?
This query touches on procedural nuances introduced by the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), which replaced the CrPC. Many wonder if magistrates must issue summons or notices to the accused before taking cognizance. The answer, backed by judicial precedents, is generally no—courts can take cognizance based on prima facie satisfaction without pre-summoning the accused. This post breaks it down with legal insights, rulings, and practical implications.
Note: This is general information based on judicial trends and not specific legal advice. Consult a lawyer for your case.
Section 138 NI Act prescribes a summary trial for cheque dishonour. The process typically starts with:- A legal notice to the drawer within 30 days of dishonour.- Filing a private complaint before a magistrate if unpaid.
Under BNSS (corresponding to CrPC Sections 190-199), the magistrate examines the complaint and evidence. Cognizance is taken if a prima facie case exists—no deep inquiry needed at this stage. Summons or warrants follow after cognizance, during process issuance (BNSS Section 206 equivalent).
Courts have clarified: The Magistrate, upon prima facie satisfaction, issues process (summons or warrants) to the accused LALIT FABRICS PRIVATE LIMITED VS LINKERS ASSOCIATES LIMITED - 1995 0 Supreme(Del) 898Shahidul Miyah, S/o. Matior Rahman vs Jahanara Begum, W/o. Late Nazrul Islam - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Gau) 6748. Pre-cognizance summoning isn't mandatory; it's post-cognizance.
BNSS emphasizes safeguards like pre-cognizance hearings in certain cases, but not universally for NI Act matters. The BNSS introduces procedural safeguards, including the requirement of a pre-cognizance hearing and opportunity for the accused to be heard before cognizance is taken Saji John, S/o Late Shri Tk Ulahannan vs Assistant Director, Directorate Of Enforcement - 2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 2316. However, cheque bounce cases follow a streamlined path.
Judicial rulings distinguish stages sharply:- Pre-cognizance: Magistrate forms prima facie opinion from complaint/evidence. No accused involvement needed. The power under Section 156(3) is exercisable at a pre-cognizance stage while the other at post-cognizance stage. A great care is, therefore, to be taken by the Magistrate while deciding the course to be adopted. Once the Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offence, it is not within his competence to revert back to pre-cognizance stage Mewa Lal Bhargav VS State of U. P. - 2021 Supreme(All) 166Ram Khelawan VS State of U. P. - 2021 Supreme(All) 1256.- Post-cognizance: Process issued, accused summoned. Evidence recording follows.
In cheque bounce, the initial step is to form a prima facie opinion that an offence has been committed, after which process is issued to the accused RAJ LAKSHMI MILLS VS SHAKTI BHAKOO - 2002 0 Supreme(SC) 657.
Supreme Court and High Courts consistently hold no absolute pre-summoning requirement:
A notable case reinforces: since the case is at pre-cognizance stage, the accused need not appear before the Court below unless, the lower Court takes cognizance and issues summons State Bank of Mysore (Now State Bank of India) VS P. Mukundan S/o Late G. Parthasarathy - 2019 Supreme(Kar) 1318. The court expunged premature process directions, stressing: complaint is at a pre-cognizance stage... If Magistrate after application of mind... feels that there is a prima facie material then he can proceed.
For PMLA-like statutes, pre-hearing may apply (Special Court cannot take cognizance without giving the accused an opportunity Saji John VS Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Government of India Cochin Zonal Office - Crimes (2025)), but NI Act cheque cases are exempt—specific provisions like BNSS Sections 223/528 don't mandate it here.
Complainant's affidavit/documents suffice pre-cognizance. Para 16 would show that a complainant need not be examined twice i.e, once at pre-cognizance stage and latter at post-cognizance stage... Affidavits and documents filed by him along with complaint can be treated as his evidence at both stages Lakshmi Agencies VS State of Andhra Pradesh.
Leading of evidence at pre-summoning stage either by way of affidavit or by oral statement cannot be treated as commencement of recording of evidence under Sec.145(2) of N.I. Act—Generally, Courts can treat affidavits and documents filed by complainant at pre-summoning stage as evidence also at post-summoning stage.
Post-appearance, Section 251 BNSS (examination) follows; recall only if ordered.
While BNSS promotes fairness, cheque bounce jurisprudence prioritizes efficiency:- No prejudice if no pre-summoning—accused rights protected post-cognizance State Bank of Mysore (Now State Bank of India) VS P. Mukundan S/o Late G. Parthasarathy - 2019 Supreme(Kar) 1318.- Magistrates must apply mind; cursory dismissal improper, but no accused hearing pre-cognizance Ram Khelawan VS State of U. P. - 2021 Supreme(All) 1256.
Recommendations for complainants/drawers:- Complainants: File robust complaint with proof; expect post-cognizance summons.- Accused: Challenge via discharge if no prima facie case; no need to appear pre-cognizance.- Courts/Prosecutors: Focus on prima facie evidence before process LALIT FABRICS PRIVATE LIMITED VS LINKERS ASSOCIATES LIMITED - 1995 0 Supreme(Del) 898.
Irrelevant contexts like company misfeasance (Directors... liable for misfeasance under Section 543 Official Liquidator Of M/s Lok Vikas Finance Corporation Ltd. VS Lokesh Kumar Singh - 2019 Supreme(Raj) 2531) or SC/ST Act don't alter NI Act procedure.
In cheque bounce cases, there is no requirement to summon the accused at the pre-cognizance stage under BNSS. Courts take cognizance on prima facie satisfaction, issuing summons afterward. This balances speed and justice, as affirmed in rulings like LALIT FABRICS PRIVATE LIMITED VS LINKERS ASSOCIATES LIMITED - 1995 0 Supreme(Del) 898Shahidul Miyah, S/o. Matior Rahman vs Jahanara Begum, W/o. Late Nazrul Islam - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Gau) 6748Ashish Kumar @ Ashish Kumar Jaiswal VS State of U. P. - 2023 0 Supreme(All) 2421
Key Takeaways:- Pre-cognizance: Prima facie review only—no accused summons.- Post-cognizance: Process issuance, evidence proper.- Evidence via affidavit bridges stages efficiently Lakshmi Agencies VS State of Andhra Pradesh.- Stay updated on BNSS transitions; procedures evolve but core NI Act remains complainant-driven.
For tailored advice, approach a legal expert. Cheque discipline prevents most disputes—settle amicably where possible.
References: All insights from cited documents; no external sources.
#ChequeBounce #BNSS #NILaw
/payee/holder of the cheque and the witnesses present as also of the issuance of the pre- cognizance notice. ... The competent jurisdictional Courts are expected to make every endeavor that the cheque bounce cases are disposed of expeditiously in furtherance of which object, Alternate Dispute Resolution Mechanism provided under the Legal Services Authorities Act needs to be tried for such cases through the modes ... So far as the case in hand is concerned, the learned....
No. 265 of 2021 on the conditions that he shall pay 20% of the cheque bounce amount to the informant. ... Therefore, even after rejection of this case, the petitioner shall be at liberty to raise the plea of Section 142(1) (a) of the N.I.Act at appropriate stage before appropriate forum and not at this stage. ... Act that “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 of ....
Consequently, this Court directs that there shall be no requirement to issue summons to the accused in terms of Section 223 of BNSS i.e., at the pre-cognizance stage. F. ... Fayaz Aahmad, 2025 SCC OnLine Kar 490 has taken the view that since NI Act is a special enactment, there is no need for the Magistrate to issue summons to the accused before taking cognizance (under Section 223 of BNSS) of complaints filed under Section 138 of NI Act. ... State and Anr., 2010 SCC ....
In both the present cases, the complaints disclose a debt. The learned MM on the basis of the complaints and the pre-summoning evidence led on behalf of the Complainant has observed that; a cheque was issued by the Accused to the Complainant; and the aforesaid cheque was dishonoured. ... However, the accused has failed to pay the cheque amount within 15 days of the receipt of the aforesaid legal notice. Hence, the present complaint has been filed. There is sufficient material available on record to #HL_....
The case lodged against the petitioner/accused and against the husband of the 2nd respondent/complainant is entirely different cases and the case in hand relating to cheque bounce case. ... And it is manifest that the said application was filed only to drag the proceedings in cheque bounce case. The 2nd respondent herein filed a private complaint under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “Cr.P.C.”) vide C.C.No.41 of 2017 on the file of learned II Additional Judicial Magistrate....
The effect of above legal proposition is that an Award passed at the pre-litigation stage or pre-cognizance stage shall have an effect of a civil decree. ... With ever growing institution of N.I. cases, there is a need of developing a mechanism for pre-litigation settlement in these cases. ... The National Legal Services Authority, being the responsible Authority in this regard, may evolve a scheme for settlement of dispute relating....
BNSS ), recognising the affidavit as a valid substitute for oral examination at the pre-cognizance stage. BNSS . The requirement of a pre-cognizance hearing now statutorily introduced under the Section 138 of the NI Act. ... A comparative reading of the above provisions makes it evident that under the erstwhile law, no right of pre-cognizance hearing was envisaged for the proposed accused. ... Accordingly, in the Court’s view, the p....
Even if the claims are taken at face value, the matter is purely civil in nature, involving monetary transactions and cheque bounce, which are already covered under the provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. ... The argument that the custodial interrogation is fraught with the danger of the person being subjected to third degree methods need not be countenanced, for, such an argument can be advanced by all accused in all criminal cases. ... He further contends that the alleged cheques are not supported by di....
At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of M/s Neeharika Infrastructure PVT Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra , AIR 2021 SC 1918 , R.P. Kapur v. ... The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. ... In this case the record discloses the relevant dates noted as under :- a) Date of cheque bounce : 17.10.2017; b) Date of Legal Notice : 09.11.2017; c) Date of expiry for making payment: 24.11.2017; d) cause of action....
BNSS , 2023. Hence, the procedure of hearing the accused at the stage of taking cognizance as prescribed in the proviso to Section 223 BNSS shall not apply to complaints under Section 138 of the N.I.Act, 1881.” ... ORAL ORDER BNSS ). Section 138 NI Act proceedings can be said to be a “Civil Sheep” in a “criminal wolf’s” clothing, as it is interest of the victim that is sought to be protected, the larger interest of the State being subsumed in the victim alone moving a Court in cheque ....
The two operate in distinct spheres at different stages. The power under Section 156(3) is exercisable at a pre-cognizance stage while the other at post-cognizance stage. A great care is, therefore, to be taken by the Magistrate while deciding the course to be adopted. Once the Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offence, it is not within his competence to revert back to pre-cognizance stage and invoke Section 156(3) Cr.P.C.
A great care is, therefore, to be taken by the Magistrate while deciding the course to be adopted. The two operate in distinct spheres at different stages. Once the Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offence, it is not within his competence to revert back to pre-cognizance stage and invoke Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. The power under Section 156(3) is exercisable at a pre-cognizance stage while the other at post-cognizance stage.
K Siddegowda and others reported in 1976 Crl.L.J. 1967. It is his further submission that though there is direction by the lower appellate Court, but since the case is at pre-cognizance stage, the accused need not appear before the Court below unless, the lower Court takes cognizance and issues summons. In order to substantiate the said contention, he relied upon the decision of Patna High Court in the case of Rajendra Lal Das and others Vs. The learned Magistrate has to make an enquiry into the case and thereafter, issue show cause notice.
The depositors lodged FIRs with Police Stations and cheque bounce cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. A loan was advanced to sister concern Lok Vikas Housing Financial Corporation Limited, Lok Vikas Leasing Limited, Lok Vikas Capital Limited and Lok Vikas Domestic Appliances Limited against the collateral securities of the Companys properties. It became overburdened for outstanding liabilities and therefore, committed defaults. As per examination of Mr. Lokesh Kumar Singh and Hari Shankar Sharma under Section 130 of the Act of 1956, it was observed th....
Para 16 would show that a complainant need not be examined twice i.e, once at pre-cognizance stage and latter at post-cognizance stage. In other words, there is no necessity to recall and reexamine the complainant after summoning the accused unless the Magistrate passes a specific order as to why the complainant was to be recalled. Affidavits and documents filed by him along with complaint can be treated as his evidence at both stages. As rightly observed by the trial Court, Para 16 and Direction No.4 (MANU/SC/0387/2014) are relevant.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
