Delay condonation in cheque complaints remains available even after cognizance when limitation is raised later.

The proviso to Section 142(b) of the Negotiable Instruments Act permits condonation of delay in appropriate cases to avoid defeat of the statutory remedy on technical limitation grounds. A later binding Supreme Court ruling was applied to hold that, where limitation is raised even after cognizance and progress in trial, the complaint must be examined on merits under the proviso rather than rejected for want of jurisdiction. The earlier view that delay could not be condoned after cognizance was displaced, and the proceedings were restored to the pre-cognizance stage for fresh consideration of condonation.

---

---

Issues: Whether the delay in filing the complaint under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 could be considered and condoned even after cognizance had been taken and the trial had progressed, and whether the earlier view that such delay could not be condoned at that stage survived in light of the Supreme Court decision.

Analysis: The proviso to clause (b) of Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 was inserted to overcome the technicality of limitation and to enable the court to condone delay in appropriate cases. The Supreme Court's ruling in Pawan Kumar Ralli held that where limitation is raised, the matter should be examined on merits in accordance with the proviso to Section 142(b), and that the complainant should not be deprived of the statutory remedy merely because the issue arose at a later stage. The earlier view taken in T.S. Muralidhar, which treated the Magistrate as lacking jurisdiction to condone delay after cognizance and trial progress, could not stand in the face of the later binding decision.

Conclusion: The petitioner's challenge succeeded. The impugned orders refusing to entertain the application for condonation of delay were set aside, and the matter was directed to proceed from the stage prior to cognizance and issuance of process.

Final Conclusion: The delay-condonation remedy under the Negotiable Instruments Act was held available on the facts of the case, the contrary earlier view was displaced, and the proceedings were restored to the pre-cognizance stage for fresh consideration.

Ratio Decidendi: The proviso to Section 142(b) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 confers a power to condone delay in appropriate cases, and a complaint should not be rejected merely because the limitation issue arises after cognizance if the court must decide the question on merits in light of the statutory purpose.

---