Condonation of delay in cheque dishonour complaints allowed where sufficient cause is shown and the request is substantively clear.

In a prosecution under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, delay in filing the complaint may be condoned under section 142(1)(b) where sufficient cause is shown. A wrong statutory reference in the condonation application does not defeat the request if the substance of the prayer is clear. Here, the complaint was filed shortly after receipt of postal endorsement confirming service of notice, the delay was treated as minor, and refusal to condone would have blocked adjudication on merits. The complaint was therefore permitted to proceed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the delay in filing the complaint under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 was liable to be condoned under section 142(1)(b) of that Act.

Analysis: The complaint was filed after the complainant received postal endorsement confirming service of the statutory notice on the accused. The delay was only about 13 days after such intimation. Quoting the wrong provision in the application did not defeat the prayer for condonation, since the substance of the request was to excuse the delay. The cause shown was accepted as sufficient, and refusal to condone would have prevented adjudication on merits on a technical ground.

Conclusion: The delay was rightly condonable, and the complaint could proceed on merits.

Ratio Decidendi: In a prosecution under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, delay in filing the complaint may be condoned under section 142(1)(b) when sufficient cause is shown, and a merely wrong statutory reference in the application does not invalidate the request if the substance of the prayer is clear.

---