Section 202 inquiry in cheque dishonour cases is not mandatory where supporting documents and affidavit sufficiently justify process.

In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the Magistrate is not required to hold a separate inquiry under Section 202(1) CrPC in every case before issuing process, even where the accused resides outside territorial jurisdiction. Where the complaint is supported by the cheque, dishonour memo, statutory notice, proof of service, and the complainant's affidavit, those materials may be sufficient for cognizance and pre-summoning process. The inquiry under Section 202(1) is limited to determining whether sufficient grounds exist to proceed, and the earlier contrary view was treated as no longer good law.

---

---

Issues: Whether, in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the Magistrate is mandatorily required to hold an inquiry under Section 202(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 before issuing process where the accused resides beyond territorial jurisdiction.

Analysis: The scope of inquiry under Section 202(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is limited to deciding whether sufficient grounds exist for proceeding against the accused. Where the complaint is supported by the cheque, dishonour memo, statutory notice, proof of service and the complainant's affidavit, the Magistrate may take cognizance and issue process on the basis of those materials. The requirement of inquiry is not absolute in every case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The decisions relied upon confirm that affidavit evidence and supporting documents can be sufficient at the pre-summoning stage, and the earlier contrary view was no longer good law.

Conclusion: The Magistrate was not bound to hold a separate inquiry under Section 202(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 before issuing process on the facts of the case, and the challenge to the cognizance order failed.

---