Premature Section 138 complaint need not be quashed when early cognizance by court causes no prejudice to accused

A complaint for cheque dishonour filed before expiry of the 15-day statutory payment period was not treated as fatal where the matter was allowed to mature and the Magistrate's early cognizance was attributable to the court. The court applied the principle that an act of the court should prejudice no one, and noted that quashing would unfairly defeat the complainant's substantive right because a fresh complaint could then be barred by limitation. In the absence of prejudice to the accused, the premature filing and premature cognizance did not justify quashing.

---

---

Issues: Whether a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 filed before expiry of the statutory 15-day period, and in which cognizance was also taken before the cause of action matured, could be quashed in proceedings under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Analysis: The complaint was presented before the expiry of the statutory period available to the drawer to make payment after notice of demand. The Court noted that a premature presentation by itself does not necessarily require dismissal if the matter is allowed to mature. The further circumstance here was that the Magistrate took cognizance before the expiry of the 15 days. The Court held that this error of the court could not be allowed to defeat the complainant's substantive right, especially because quashing at that stage would bar a fresh complaint by limitation under Section 142. The principle that an act of the court should prejudice no one was applied, and the absence of prejudice to the accused was also relevant.

Conclusion: The premature filing and premature cognizance did not justify quashing the complaint, and the petition was rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: A premature complaint under Section 138 is not liable to be quashed merely because it was filed before the cause of action matured, and an error of the court in taking cognizance too early cannot prejudice the complainant when no prejudice is caused to the accused.

---