https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465466 A joint complaint by more than one complainant was held not maintainable under the Code of Criminal Procedure, because the term "complainant" in Section 200 was read in light of the statutory scheme, which does not contemplate multiple complainants in a single complaint. The same interpretation was applied to Chapter XVII of the Negotiable Instruments Act: Sections 138, 141, 142 and 143 were treated as supporting a complaint by a single person, not a joint complaint. A joint dishonour memo and joint demand notice did not change this position, since each cheque issued in favour of a different person gave rise to a separate cause of action. Proceedings survived only for the cheque relating to one complainant. en-us Fri, 23 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 26 Dec 2025 19:22:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465466 A joint complaint by more than one complainant was held not maintainable under the Code of Criminal Procedure, because the term "complainant" in Section 200 was read in light of the statutory scheme, which does not contemplate multiple complainants in a single complaint. The same interpretation was applied to Chapter XVII of the Negotiable Instruments Act: Sections 138, 141, 142 and 143 were treated as supporting a complaint by a single person, not a joint complaint. A joint dishonour memo and joint demand notice did not change this position, since each cheque issued in favour of a different person gave rise to a separate cause of action. Proceedings survived only for the cheque relating to one complainant. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 23 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465466