Affidavit evidence in cheque dishonour cases may be used at both stages, with summary trial procedure ensuring speedy disposal.

In complaints under the Negotiable Instruments Act, the complainant's affidavit may be treated as evidence at both the pre-summoning and post-summoning stages, avoiding repeated examination unless the Magistrate orders recall for cross-examination under Section 145(2). The Court also clarified that cheque dishonour cases under Sections 138 and 143 must be handled as summary trials under the Code of Criminal Procedure, with Magistrates following streamlined procedural directions on cognizance, summons, plea, bail, notice, affidavit evidence, and cross-examination to secure expeditious disposal.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether, in complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the complainant's affidavit can be treated as evidence at the pre-summoning and post-summoning stages without requiring examination. (ii) What procedure should be followed by Magistrates for speedy disposal of cheque dishonour cases under Sections 138 and 143 of the Negotiable Instruments Act read with the summary trial provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Issue (i): Whether, in complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the complainant's affidavit can be treated as evidence at the pre-summoning and post-summoning stages without requiring repeated examination.

Analysis: Section 145 permits the complainant to give evidence by affidavit and makes such affidavit admissible in inquiry, trial or other proceeding. The provision is procedural and is intended to avoid duplication of evidence. Once the complaint and supporting affidavit are filed, the same material may be read in evidence at both stages unless the Magistrate, for recorded reasons or on an application under Section 145(2), directs recall for cross-examination. The accused is not required to have the complainant examined twice merely because summons has been issued.

Conclusion: The complainant's affidavit is admissible as evidence at both stages, and examination is not required unless the Magistrate specifically orders recall under Section 145(2).

Issue (ii): What procedure should be followed by Magistrates for speedy disposal of cheque dishonour cases under Sections 138 and 143 of the Negotiable Instruments Act read with the summary trial provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Analysis: Section 143 mandates summary trial of offences under Chapter XVII and applies Sections 262 to 265 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as far as may be. The object of the amendment is expeditious disposal, and the Court framed working directions to streamline cognizance, service of summons, plea recording, bail, notice under Section 251 of the Code, affidavit evidence, cross-examination, and day-to-day progress. The directions are designed to make the summary procedure effective and to ensure that trials are concluded promptly, preferably within the statutory time frame.

Conclusion: Magistrates dealing with Section 138 complaints must follow the issued procedural directions and conduct such cases as summary trials with a view to speedy and expeditious disposal.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded in securing binding procedural directions for cheque dishonour prosecutions, particularly on affidavit evidence and summary trial management, to advance the legislative object of prompt adjudication.

Ratio Decidendi: In prosecutions under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the complainant's affidavit may serve as evidence at the relevant stages, and Magistrates must apply the summary trial procedure in a manner that ensures expeditious disposal consistent with Sections 143 and 145 of the Act and the corresponding provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

---