Section 138 cheque complaint presumptions apply; factual defences cannot be tested at summoning stage.

A complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act disclosed the statutory ingredients for prosecution, and execution of the cheque attracted the presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 in favour of the complainant. Allegations that the cheque was misused, or that it became invalid after merger of the bank, involved disputed questions of fact that could not be conclusively examined in quashing jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC. At the summoning stage, the court was not required to conduct a detailed factual inquiry or displace the statutory presumptions before trial, and the summoning order was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the summoning order in a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 could be quashed at the pre-trial stage on the basis of factual defences and alleged irregularities in the cheque and return memo.

Analysis: The complaint disclosed the ingredients of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, and once execution of the cheque was shown, the presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 operated in favour of the complainant. The defence that the cheque had been misused, or that it became invalid after merger of the bank, raised disputed questions of fact that could not be conclusively determined in quashing jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. At the stage of summoning, the Court was not required to conduct a detailed enquiry into contested facts or displace the statutory presumption before trial.

Conclusion: The challenge to the summoning order was rejected and the order was upheld, leaving the petitioner to raise his defences before the trial Court.

---