Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + SC Companies Law - 1999 (10) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
1999 (10) TMI 718 - SUPREME COURTWhether there were valid notices as required under Clause (b) of the proviso to Section 138 of the Act? Held that:- In the notices it was stated that on re-presentation of the cheques if returned unpaid, the appellant-bank would report the matter to the police for initiating appropriate criminal action against the respondents. Under Section 142 of the Act, court can take cognizance of an offence punishable under Section 138 only on a complaint in writing made by the payee. Therefore, the police could not have started investigation under Section 138 of the Act. But if a cheque is dishonoured drawer may expose himself to prosecution under various Sections of the Indian Penal Code which are cognizable and police could take up investigation. What was indicated in the notice was that in addition to the legal action by the appellant-bank under the Act, option was kept open for taking action against the respondents under the provisions of Indian Penal Code by informing the police. Therefore, the contention of learned counsel for the respondents has no force. For the reasons stated above we hold that notices were valid and proper and, therefore, the High Court erred in holding that there was no proper notice for payment as required under Section 138 of the Act.
|