Probable defence standard governs cross-examination rights in cheque dishonour proceedings, limiting refusal at the Section 145(2) stage.

In a prosecution under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Section 145(2) is an enabling provision that protects the accused's right to contest the complaint by cross-examining the complainant. Once the accused discloses a probable defence that is not merely a moonshine defence, the Magistrate should permit cross-examination and should not test the defence on its detailed merits or insist on exhaustive particulars at that stage. The right to rebut the statutory presumption under Section 139 through cross-examination forms part of fair trial rights, and summary-trial procedure does not justify denying that opportunity when a plausible defence is shown.

---

---

Issues: Whether the accused, in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, was entitled to summon and cross-examine the complainant under Section 145(2) on the basis of the defence disclosed in the application, and whether the Magistrate could refuse that request by examining the sufficiency or detail of the defence at that stage.

Analysis: Section 145(2) is an enabling provision intended to protect the accused's right to contest the complaint. In proceedings under Section 138, once the accused files a written application disclosing a defence that is not merely a moonshine defence, the Magistrate's role is limited to seeing whether a probable defence is disclosed. The Magistrate is not required to enter into a detailed evaluation of the merits of that defence or insist on exhaustive particulars before permitting cross-examination. The right to rebut the statutory presumption under Section 139 through cross-examination is part of the accused's fair trial rights, and summary-trial discipline does not justify shutting out that opportunity where a plausible defence is shown.

Conclusion: The accused was entitled to have the complainant summoned for cross-examination under Section 145(2), and the refusal to permit that course on the ground of vagueness was unsustainable.

Ratio Decidendi: In a Section 138 prosecution, an application under Section 145(2) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 must be allowed when the accused discloses a probable defence, and the Magistrate cannot reject it by adjudging the merits or insisting on detailed particulars at that stage.

---