Section 138 complaints must be read with the sworn statement; omission alone cannot defeat cognizance when material particulars are pleaded.

Complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act cannot be dismissed solely for omissions in the sworn statement when the complaints themselves contain the material particulars. The sworn statement at the pre-process stage must be read with the complaint as part of the record, and the Magistrate must assess both together to decide whether a prima facie case exists and process should issue. By relying only on the sworn statement and ignoring the complaint averments on the loan transaction, cheques, presentation, and statutory notice, the Magistrate applied the wrong procedure. The dismissal was held erroneous and unsustainable, and the complaints were directed to be taken on file and proceed according to law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act could be dismissed solely on the basis of omissions in the sworn statement when the complaints themselves contained the requisite particulars.

Analysis: The complaints disclosed the material particulars relating to the loan transaction, the cheques, presentation, and statutory notice. The sworn statement recorded at the pre-process stage had to be read with the complaint and not in isolation. For the purpose of taking cognizance and deciding whether process should issue, the Magistrate was required to consider the complaint as part of the record along with the sworn statement. By relying only on the sworn statement and ignoring the averments in the complaints, the Magistrate failed to apply the correct procedure and wrongly concluded that no prima facie case was made out.

Conclusion: The dismissal of the complaints was erroneous and unsustainable. The complaints were directed to be taken on file and proceeded with in accordance with law.

---