Section 138 complaint amendment upheld where cheque number error was only formal and caused no prejudice.

A complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act could be amended to correct the cheque number where the cheque, bank memo and statutory notice all reflected the correct number and the mistake was confined to the complaint. The court treated the discrepancy as a formal infirmity, found no prejudice to the accused, and held that the amendment did not alter the foundation of the prosecution. The distinction from the cited precedent was accepted on facts, and the orders permitting amendment disclosed no jurisdictional error. The challenge to the amendment therefore failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 could be amended to correct the cheque number when the cheque, bank memo, and statutory notice all referred to the correct number and the mistake appeared only in the complaint.

Analysis: The discrepancy in the complaint was found to be a simple and formal infirmity. The cheque and statutory notice consistently mentioned the correct cheque number, and the correction did not affect the foundation of the prosecution or cause prejudice to the applicant. A formal amendment was therefore permissible, and the distinction drawn by the applicant from the cited precedent was accepted as valid on facts. In these circumstances, the orders allowing amendment did not disclose any jurisdictional error.

Conclusion: The amendment correcting the cheque number was validly allowed and the challenge to it failed.

---