Supreme Court says in cheque bounce cases cognizance of cases be taken only after determining the question of limitation

INTRODUCTION

Supreme Court of India has held that a trial court must first condone any delay in filing a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI Act) before taking cognizance of the offence in cases where the complaint is filed beyond the prescribed limitation period. This ruling was delivered on January 6, 2026. 

Facts and Background of the Case

The respondent, and her husband had lent Rs. 5,40,000/- as financial assistance to the appellant for the purchase of a house. Cheques issued by the appellant in repayment/discharge of this liability were dishonored. A complaint under Section 138 NI Act was filed, but it was belated (delayed by two days in presentation/filing). The Magistrate took cognizance of the offence on the very day the complaint was filed without first addressing/condoning the delay. Proceedings continued, but the appellant challenged this, eventually leading to the Supreme Court.

Observations 

The Supreme Court referred to the proviso to Section 142(1)(b) of the NI Act, which states that a court may take cognizance of a complaint filed after the one-month limitation period (from the date of cause of action) only if the complainant satisfies the court that there was sufficient cause for the delay.

The Court emphasized:

The language of the proviso is clear and unambiguous. Condonation of delay (after being satisfied of sufficient cause) must precede the act of taking cognizance. Taking cognizance first and condoning delay later is not permissible — it amounts to a jurisdictional defect not a mere procedural irregularity or curable error. The satisfaction regarding sufficient cause, leading to condonation, must come before cognizance is taken. The Supreme Court set aside the Karnataka High Court's view (which had treated cognizance and condonation as interchangeable or curable) and quashed the proceedings, as the Magistrate had erred in taking cognizance without first condoning the delay. This judgment reinforces procedural rigor in cheque dishonor cases, ensuring that the statutory timelines and conditions under the NI Act are strictly followed before a court assumes jurisdiction to proceed with the trial.

Conclusion

This is an important judgement delivered by the Supreme Court of India, thereby, clarifying the nuances involved in entertaining the cases filed under Sec 138 of the NI act.