In Re: Expeditious Trial of Cases Under Section 138 of N.I. Act 1881 v. , 2021 INSC 257, [2021] 4 S.C.R. 257 (SC).

1. Case Details

• Case: In Re: Expeditious Trial of Cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881
• Case Number: Suo Motu Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 2 of 2020
• Citation: [2021] 4 SCR 257
• Date: 16 April 2021
• Court: Supreme Court of India
• Bench: S.A. Bobde CJI, L. Nageswara Rao, B.R. Gavai, A.S. Bopanna and S. Ravindra Bhat, JJ.

2. About the Case

The Supreme Court initiated suo motu proceedings to address delays in cases involving cheque dishonour under Section 138 of the NI Act. The Court identified procedural difficulties, particularly delays in serving summons, prolonged trials and increasing case pendency. At the relevant time, approximately 35.16 lakh Section 138 cases were pending.

3. Key Issues and Findings

1. Conversion of Trial: A Magistrate must record reasons before converting a summary trial into a summons trial under Section 143 of the NI Act.
2. Inquiry under Section 202 CrPC: An inquiry is mandatory before issuing summons where the accused resides outside the territorial jurisdiction of the Magistrate.
3. Evidence through Affidavits: Section 145 of the NI Act permits evidence through affidavits, facilitating simpler and faster proceedings.
4. Service of Summons: Service in one complaint may be treated as sufficient for other connected complaints arising from the same transaction before the same court.
5. Joint Trial: The Court recommended legislative consideration of a single trial for multiple Section 138 offences committed within twelve months.
6. Recall of Summons: Trial Courts cannot review or recall their summoning orders by exercising inherent powers, as established in Adalat Prasad v. Rooplal Jindal and Subramanium Sethuraman v. State of Maharashtra.
7. Section 258 CrPC: The provision relating to stoppage of proceedings was held inapplicable to Section 138 complaints. The decision in Meters and Instruments v. Kanchan Mehta was disapproved.
8. Mediation: The Court encouraged mediation for suitable pending appeals and revision proceedings arising from Section 138 cases.

4. Ratio Decidendi

The Magistrate must exercise the power to convert a summary trial into a summons trial cautiously and record appropriate reasons. Further, an inquiry under Section 202 CrPC is mandatory when the accused resides beyond the court's territorial jurisdiction.

5. Final Outcome

The Supreme Court issued procedural directions to improve the disposal of cheque dishonour cases, recommended legislative changes for joint trials and referred certain unresolved matters to the Justice R.C. Chavan Committee. The matter was directed to be listed after eight weeks before a three-Judge Bench.

6. Legal Significance

The judgment aims to reduce delays in cheque dishonour litigation by improving trial procedures, ensuring compliance with statutory safeguards, simplifying evidence recording and encouraging mediation.