Affidavit evidence under the Negotiable Instruments Act is available to the complainant, not the accused, in cheque dishonour trials.

Section 145 of the Negotiable Instruments Act permits affidavit evidence in lieu of chief examination for the complainant, but not for the accused. The Kerala High Court applied Supreme Court authority to hold that an accused in a Section 138 prosecution has no right to tender proof affidavit as chief evidence, and earlier contrary views were treated as no longer good law. Because the trial court wrongly accepted the accused's affidavit evidence, the conviction-related findings were set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh consideration after giving the accused an opportunity to adduce lawful defence evidence.

---

---

Issues: Whether the accused in a prosecution under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 could tender chief evidence by affidavit under section 145 of the Act, and whether the trial court's acceptance of such affidavit evidence required the conviction-related findings to be set aside and the matter remanded.

Analysis: Section 145(1) expressly permits the complainant to give evidence on affidavit, while section 145(2) only enables the Court, on application, to summon and examine a person who has given affidavit evidence. The provision does not extend the complainant's special mode of proof to the accused. The Supreme Court authority construing sections 143 and 145 was applied to hold that the accused cannot claim a right to file a proof affidavit in lieu of chief examination. Earlier views to the contrary were treated as not good law. The reliance placed on the general procedural directions in the later Supreme Court decision did not alter the statutory position. Once the accused's affidavit evidence was wrongly accepted, the proper course was to afford an opportunity to adduce defence evidence and to proceed afresh; the defect was not treated as one curable merely by ignoring it.

Conclusion: The accused could not tender chief evidence by affidavit under section 145 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Acceptance of such evidence was illegal, the impugned judgment was set aside, and the matter was remanded for fresh consideration after giving the accused an opportunity to adduce evidence.

Ratio Decidendi: Under section 145 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, affidavit evidence in lieu of chief examination is available to the complainant alone and not to the accused; if the accused's affidavit evidence is wrongly accepted, the trial must be reopened for fresh consideration with an to lead lawful defence evidence.

---