In Re: EXPEDITIOUS TRIAL OF CASES UNDER SECTION 138 OF N.I. ACT 1881

Supreme court two judge bench in April 2021 issues the guidelines in Suo motto cognizance writ regarding concern about pendency of Cheque bounce matters in Indian Courts. While issuing guidelines Supreme Court  requested all The High Courts to issue practice directions to the Magistrates :

1)  To record reasons before converting trial of complaints under Section 138 of the Act from summary trial to summons trial.

 2) Inquiry shall be conducted on receipt of complaints under Section 138 of the Act to arrive at sufficient grounds to proceed against the accused, when such accused resides beyond the territorial jurisdiction of the court.

 3) For the conduct of inquiry under Section 202 of the Code, evidence of witnesses on behalf of the complainant shall be permitted to be taken on affidavit. In suitable cases, the Magistrate can restrict the inquiry to examination of documents without insisting for examination of witnesses.

 4)  That suitable amendments be made to the Act for provision of one trial against a person for multiple offences under Section 138 of the Act committed within a period of 12 months, notwithstanding the restriction in Section 219 of the Code.(Recommended)

 5) The High Courts are requested to issue practice directions to the Trial Courts to treat service of summons in one complaint under Section 138 forming part of a transaction, as deemed service in respect of all the complaints filed before the same court relating to dishonour of cheques issued as part of the said transaction.

 6) Judgments of this Court in Adalat Prasad V Rooplal Jindal 2004 SC  and Subramanium Sethuraman V. State of Maharastra 2004 Sc have interpreted the law correctly and we reiterate that there is no inherent power of Trial Courts to review or recall the issue of summons. This does not affect the power of the Trial Court under Section 322 of the Code to revisit the order of issue of process in case it is brought to the court’s notice that it lacks jurisdiction to try the complaint.

7) Section 258 of the Code is not applicable to complaints under Section 138 of the Act and findings to the contrary in Meters and Instruments  Private Limited and Another v. Kanchan Mehta 2018 Sc do not lay down correct law.