Retrospective affidavit evidence under cheque dishonour procedure upheld for pending complaints, but not for cheating summons.

Section 145 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was held to be procedural and therefore applicable retrospectively to complaints under Section 138 pending when it came into force; the objection to complainant affidavit evidence was rejected. However, the affidavit procedure is confined to Section 138 proceedings and cannot be extended to sustain summoning for cheating under Section 420 IPC. On that basis, the summons for the IPC offence was quashed, while the cheque dishonour prosecution was allowed to proceed in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether Section 145 of the Negotiable Instruments Act applies retrospectively to complaints under Section 138 pending on the date of its commencement; (ii) Whether the affidavit procedure under Section 145 can be used to sustain summoning for an offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Issue (i): Whether Section 145 of the Negotiable Instruments Act applies retrospectively to complaints under Section 138 pending on the date of its commencement.

Analysis: Section 145 was inserted to simplify trial procedure in cheque dishonour cases and is procedural in character. It does not create or take away substantive rights of the accused. Procedural amendments are ordinarily retrospective unless a contrary intention is shown, and the provision contains a non obstante clause overriding the general procedure under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The Court relied on the settled view that the complainant's affidavit evidence could be used in pending cases after the amendment came into force.

Conclusion: Section 145 of the Negotiable Instruments Act applies to pending complaints under Section 138 and the objection to affidavit evidence was rejected.

Issue (ii): Whether the affidavit procedure under Section 145 can be used to sustain summoning for an offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Analysis: The special procedure under Section 145 is confined to proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. It cannot be extended to an offence under the Indian Penal Code, 1860. A summoning order for cheating based on affidavit evidence taken under Section 145 was therefore without legal foundation.

Conclusion: The summoning of the applicant for the offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 was quashed.

Final Conclusion: The challenge succeeded only in part. The summons for the Penal Code offence was set aside, while the prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was left undisturbed and directed to proceed in accordance with law.

Ratio Decidendi: Section 145 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is a procedural provision having retrospective application to pending cheque dishonour complaints, but its special affidavit-based procedure is confined to prosecutions under Section 138 and cannot be used for offences under the Penal Code.

---