Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Padamsingh Dhulsingh Sisodiya, filed a petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking quashing of Criminal Case No. 61461 of 2022 pending before the Additional Senior Civil Judge and ACJM, Surat, for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The complaint alleged that the petitioner issued a cheque for Rs. 20 lakhs in favour of the complainant, which was dishonoured with the remark 'referred to drawer'. The complainant issued a demand notice dated 25.08.2022, which was served on the petitioner on 29.08.2022. Despite service, the petitioner did not make payment, and the complainant lodged the complaint on 12.10.2022. The petitioner argued that the complaint was premature because it was filed before the expiry of the statutory 15-day period from the date of service of notice, as required under Section 138 of the NI Act. The court examined the dates and found that the notice was served on 29.08.2022, and the 15-day period expired on 13.09.2022. However, the complaint was filed on 12.10.2022, which was after the expiry of the 15-day period. The court noted that the complaint was filed on 12.10.2022, which is after the expiry of the 15-day period from 29.08.2022 (expiring on 13.09.2022). Therefore, the complaint was not premature. However, the court observed that the complaint was filed on 12.10.2022, which is after the expiry of the 15-day period. The court held that the complaint was not premature and dismissed the petition. The court found no merit in the petition and dismissed it.
Headnote
A) Negotiable Instruments Act - Dishonour of Cheque - Section 138 - Premature Complaint - Complaint filed before expiry of 15-day period from service of demand notice is not maintainable - The court held that the mandatory notice period under Section 138 of the NI Act must be strictly complied with, and a complaint filed prematurely is liable to be quashed - Held that the complaint was filed on 12.10.2022, whereas the notice was served on 29.08.2022, and the 15-day period expired on 13.09.2022, making the complaint premature (Paras 1-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, filed before the expiry of the statutory 15-day period from the date of service of demand notice, is maintainable and liable to be quashed.
Final Decision
The petition is dismissed. The complaint is not premature as it was filed after the expiry of the 15-day period from service of notice.
Law Points
- Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act
- 1881
- mandatory notice period
- premature complaint
- quashing of criminal proceedings
- Article 226 Constitution of India
Case Details
2026 LawText (GUJ) (03) 948
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 3142 of 2026
HL PATEL ADVOCATES(2034) for the Applicant(s) No. 1, MR.HIMANSHU PATEL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
Padamsingh Dhulsingh Sisodiya
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking quashing of criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
Remedy Sought
Quashing of Criminal Case No. 61461 of 2022 pending before Addl. Senior Civil Judge and ACJM, Surat.
Filing Reason
Petitioner alleged that the complaint under Section 138 NI Act was filed prematurely before expiry of the statutory 15-day period from service of demand notice.
Issues
Whether the complaint under Section 138 NI Act was filed prematurely before expiry of the 15-day notice period.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the complaint was filed before the expiry of the 15-day period from service of notice, making it premature and liable to be quashed.
Ratio Decidendi
The mandatory 15-day period under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, for payment after service of demand notice must be strictly complied with. A complaint filed after the expiry of this period is maintainable. In this case, the notice was served on 29.08.2022, the 15-day period expired on 13.09.2022, and the complaint was filed on 12.10.2022, which is after the expiry, hence not premature.
Judgment Excerpts
By filing the present petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:- (A) This Hon’ble Court may pleased be to issue any appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside criminal case bearing no.61461 of 2022 dated 12.10.2022 registered with Addl. Senior Civil Judge and ACJM, Surat below Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 in the interest of justice.
The facts and circumstances giving rise to filing the present petition are such that the complaint being Criminal Case No.61461 of 2022 has been lodged against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 138 N. I. Act wherein it is the case of the complainant that the petitioner had allegedly drawn cheque whereby Rs.20 Lakhs bearing Cheque No.417584 of his bank in favour of the complainant and the said cheque has deposited in his bank for clearance. However, the said cheque got dishonored with the remark 'referred to drawer'.
Procedural History
The complaint was lodged on 12.10.2022 before the Addl. Senior Civil Judge and ACJM, Surat. The petitioner filed the present petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking quashing of the complaint. The High Court heard the matter and dismissed the petition on 05.03.2026.
Acts & Sections
- Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881: 138
- Constitution of India: 226, 227
