Negotiable Instruments Act complaints may treat non-impleadment of the company as curable, with impleadment decided according to law.

In a complaint under Sections 138, 141 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, non-impleadment of the company was treated as a curable defect where the complaint alleged that cheques were issued in the course of the company's business and the named applicants were connected with the transaction. The trial court was found to have proceeded on an incorrect analogy from other criminal proceedings and to have overlooked the special nature of NI Act complaints, while the revisional order left the impleadment request open for decision according to law. The summoning orders were set aside and the matter remitted for consideration of the impleadment applications; the applicants were not entitled to be heard at that stage.

---

---

Issues: Whether the impugned summoning orders could be sustained in a complaint under Sections 138, 141 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 when the company was not initially arrayed as an accused and the application seeking impleadment of the company had not been formally decided.

Analysis: The complaint disclosed that the cheques were issued in the course of commercial dealings by the company and that the named applicants were connected with its business and the dishonour of the cheques. In such circumstances, non-impleadment of the company was treated as a curable defect and the filing of an impleadment application was considered legally permissible. The court found that the trial court had, in substance, taken note of the impleadment request but proceeded on an incorrect analogy applicable to other criminal proceedings, ignoring the special nature of a complaint under the Negotiable Instruments Act. The revisional order remanding the matter had also left the trial court free to consider the impleadment request in accordance with law. At the same time, the applicants were held not entitled to be heard at that stage.

Conclusion: The impugned summoning orders could not be sustained in their present form and were set aside, with the matter remitted to the trial court to decide the impleadment applications in accordance with law.

---