Cognizance beyond limitation under Section 138 requires reasoned condonation and hearing of the accused before delay is excused.

Section 142(1) of the Negotiable Instruments Act permits cognizance of a Section 138 complaint beyond the one-month period only on a judicial finding of sufficient cause for delay. The delay cannot be condoned mechanically; the court must pass a reasoned speaking order showing satisfaction on limitation and must give the accused an opportunity to be heard before condonation. The stated effect is that cognizance based on an unreasoned condonation order, or without hearing the accused, cannot be sustained and the limitation question must be considered afresh.

---

---

Issues: Whether cognizance of a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act could be taken beyond the prescribed period of limitation without a speaking order on condonation and without hearing the accused.

Analysis: Section 142(1) of the Negotiable Instruments Act bars cognizance of a complaint under Section 138 if it is filed beyond one month from the date the cause of action arises, but it also permits the Court to take cognizance after the prescribed period if sufficient cause for the delay is shown. The discretion to extend limitation must be exercised judicially and on well-recognised principles. Where delay is condoned, the order must indicate reasons and satisfaction regarding sufficient cause. The accused is entitled to an opportunity of being heard before the delay is condoned.

Conclusion: Cognizance could not be sustained on the impugned order as the question of limitation had to be considered afresh after hearing the accused and by passing a reasoned order on sufficient cause.

Ratio Decidendi: In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, cognizance beyond limitation can be taken only after judicially recording sufficient cause for condonation of delay, and the accused must be heard before such condonation is ordered.

---