Joint account holder liability under cheque dishonour law cannot be imposed without being the drawer of the cheque.

Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act fastens liability on the drawer of a cheque drawn on an account maintained by that person and returned unpaid for the reasons specified in the provision. A mere joint account holder is not liable on that basis alone, because the section does not create vicarious liability for another account holder and the analogy of Section 141 cannot be extended without statutory support. Penal provisions must be strictly construed, and where the complaint does not disclose the petitioner's role as drawer, prosecution is unsustainable. The complaint against the joint account holder was therefore liable to be quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether a person who is only a joint account holder, but not the drawer of the dishonoured cheque, can be proceeded against under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

Analysis: Liability under Section 138 attaches to the person who draws the cheque on an account maintained by him or her and whose cheque is returned unpaid for the reasons stated in the provision. The provision does not, by itself, create vicarious liability for another joint account holder merely because the account is jointly maintained. The analogy of Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 cannot be extended to impose such liability on a joint account holder in the absence of statutory support. Penal provisions are to be construed strictly, and the complaint disclosed no specific role of the petitioner as the drawer of the cheque.

Conclusion: The petitioner, being only a joint account holder and not the drawer of the cheque, could not be prosecuted under Section 138; the complaint against her was liable to be quashed.

Ratio Decidendi: Vicarious liability under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 cannot be fastened on a joint account holder who is not the drawer of the cheque unless the statute expressly so provides.

---