Cheque dishonour liability under Section 138 applies only to the drawer; proceedings against a non-drawer without notice can be quashed.

Section 138 liability attaches only to the drawer of the cheque after service of the statutory notice required by the provision. Where the accused is not the drawer, the account was under another person's exclusive control, and no notice was issued to that accused, criminal prosecution lacks legal foundation. In such circumstances, the High Court may invoke Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process and secure the ends of justice. The proceedings against the non-drawer were therefore quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether criminal proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 could continue against an accused who was not the drawer of the cheque and to whom no statutory notice had been issued.

Analysis: Liability under Section 138 attaches to the drawer of the cheque after service of the statutory notice contemplated by the provision. On the admitted facts, the petitioner was not the drawer, the first accused had exclusive control over the account, and no notice was issued to the petitioner. In such circumstances, continuation of the prosecution against the petitioner would lack legal foundation. The inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 could therefore be invoked to prevent abuse of process and secure the ends of justice.

Conclusion: The proceedings against the petitioner could not be sustained and were liable to be quashed; the petition was allowed in favour of the petitioner.

Ratio Decidendi: A prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 can be maintained only against the drawer of the cheque after issuance of statutory notice, and criminal proceedings against a non-drawer without such notice are liable to be quashed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

---