Joint complaint under cheque dishonour law upheld where different drawers acted in the same transaction and no prejudice was shown.

A single complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was treated as maintainable where dishonoured cheques issued by different persons arose from the same land transaction and were linked to the same legally enforceable liability. The Court noted that authorities relied on by the challengers involved multiple cheques from one drawer and did not control this situation. It also found the statutory notice sufficient because it specifically demanded the cheque amount. Reading Section 223 CrPC with the principle that joint trial is permissible for offences arising from the same transaction absent shown prejudice, the Court held that the different drawers did not invalidate joint proceedings and rejected the quash petition.

---

---

Issues: Whether a single complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was maintainable and whether the petitioners could be jointly proceeded against when the dishonoured cheques were issued by two different persons in the same transaction.

Analysis: The challenge was founded on the plea that complaints relating to dishonoured cheques issued by different drawers must be filed separately. The Court noted that the earlier decisions relied upon dealt with multiple cheques issued by one drawer and did not directly answer the present situation. It further found that the notice demanded the cheque amount specifically and therefore complied with the requirement discussed in the cited Supreme Court decision. On the question of joint trial, the Court held that the facts arose out of one land transaction and the cheques were issued towards discharge of the same legally enforceable liability. Reading Section 223 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with the general principle that joint trial is permissible where offences arise out of the same transaction and no prejudice is shown, the Court held that the procedural objection did not defeat the proceedings.

Conclusion: A single complaint and joint trial were held maintainable, and the quash petition was rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: Where dishonoured cheques issued by different persons arise out of the same transaction and the accused suffer no shown prejudice, a joint complaint and joint trial are not invalid merely because the drawers are different.

---