Section 145 governs cognizance and trial in cheque dishonour cases; affidavit evidence admissible at pre- and post-summoning stages

The HC held that affidavit evidence may be relied upon at both pre- and post-summoning stages in cheque-dishonour prosecutions and that the special procedure under section 145 of the Negotiable Instruments Act governs cognizance, issuance of process and trial. The non-obstante clause in section 145 overrides conflicting provisions of the CrPC, including subsequent amendments to section 202, so as not to displace the special procedure unless the NI Act is expressly amended. Petition challenging application of the special procedure was dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether a Magistrate is required to carry out a further enquiry under section 202 Cr.P.C. before issuing process in a complaint under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act where the complainant has filed evidence by affidavit under section 145 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

Analysis: The Court examined the special procedure introduced by the Negotiable Instruments (Amendment and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 2002, including sections 143147, and in particular section 145 which permits the complainant's evidence to be given by affidavit notwithstanding the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Statement of Objects and Reasons, earlier decisions of this Court and the Supreme Court (notably Indian Bank Association v. Union of India) were considered to interpret the scope of section 145. The Supreme Court's guidelines on cognizance, issuance of summons, acceptance of affidavit evidence at pre-summoning and post-summoning stages, and summary trial procedure were applied. The Court further noted that the non-obstante clause in section 145 prevents subsequent amendments to the Code (such as to section 202) from overriding the special statutory procedure unless a contrary intention is shown by corresponding amendment to the Negotiable Instruments Act. On these grounds the Court held that affidavit evidence under section 145 dispenses with the need for preliminary deposition under section 200/202 Cr.P.C. and that the petitioners challenge was an attempt to delay proceedings.

Conclusion: The petition challenging issuance of process for non-compliance with section 202 Cr.P.C. is rejected; the legal position that affidavit evidence under section 145 of the Negotiable Instruments Act dispenses with preliminary inquiry under section 200/202 Cr.P.C. is affirmed in favour of the Respondent.

---