Legal heir can prosecute cheque dishonour complaint after payee's death; proceedings do not abate automatically.

A legal heir of a deceased cheque payee may present and prosecute a Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act complaint, even though the heir is not a holder in due course in the strict sense. The Court treated the heir as stepping into the shoes of the payee for practical purposes and held that the payee's death does not, by itself, terminate the criminal proceedings or make the complaint non-maintainable, provided the complainant establishes legal representative status if disputed. The dismissal of the complaint by the Sessions Judge was therefore unjustified.

---

---

Issues: Whether the legal heir of a deceased payee can present, maintain, and prosecute a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, and whether the death of the payee terminates the criminal proceedings.

Analysis: The complaint arose from a cheque issued in favour of the deceased payee, which was presented by his wife as legal heir after his death and was dishonoured. The Court held that the legal heir of the payee is not a holder in due course in the strict sense, but, for practical purposes, steps into the shoes of the payee. It further held that the death of the payee does not, by itself, render the complaint non-maintainable or bring the prosecution to an end, provided the complainant establishes her status as the legal representative where disputed.

Conclusion: The complaint was maintainable at the instance of the legal heir, and the Sessions Judge was not justified in dismissing it.

Ratio Decidendi: On the death of a cheque payee, the legal heir may present and prosecute a Section 138 complaint as the payee for practical purposes, and such proceedings do not abate merely because the payee has died.

---