Premature Section 138 complaint fails when filed before the statutory 15-day notice period matures.

A complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is maintainable only after the drawer fails to pay within 15 days of receipt of the demand notice. Where actual service of notice is not proved, deemed service cannot be used to treat the cause of action as having arisen before expiry of that statutory period. Since the complaint in this matter was filed before 15 days had elapsed from the deemed date of service, the cause of action had not matured and the complaint was premature. The conviction and sentence were set aside and the accused was acquitted.

---

---

Issues: Whether the criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 was maintainable when it was filed before expiry of the statutory period after service of demand notice.

Analysis: Liability under Section 138 arises only when the cheque is dishonoured, notice is issued within the prescribed time, and the drawer fails to pay within 15 days of receipt of notice. The Court held that where actual service of notice is not proved, deemed service could not be treated as having given rise to cause of action before expiry of the statutory period. On the facts, the complaint was filed before the expiry of 15 days from the deemed date of service, so the requisite cause of action had not arisen when cognizance was sought.

Conclusion: The complaint was premature and not legally maintainable; the conviction and sentence were set aside and the petitioner was acquitted.

Final Conclusion: The revision succeeded because the prosecution was instituted before the statutory cause of action under Section 138 had matured.

Ratio Decidendi: A complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 cannot be maintained unless 15 days have elapsed after service of the demand notice, and a complaint filed before that period is void for want of cause of action.

---