Chapter XVII - Of Penalties in Case of Dishonour of Certain Cheques for Insufficiency of Funds in the Accounts
Section 142
Section 142: Complaint timing and territorial jurisdiction
Section 142 identifies who may make the written cheque-dishonour complaint, its filing period, the competent court level and the bank-branch test for territorial jurisdiction.
On this page
Need advice on Section 142?
This article is for general information. Refer to the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 official text for the official provisions. If you need professional advice for your situation, contact Bizeneed.
Statutory text
Bare law
(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974),— (a) no court shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under section 138 except upon a complaint, in writing, made by the payee or, as the case may be, the holder in due course of the cheque;
(b) such complaint is made within one month of the date on which the cause of action arises under clause (c) of the proviso to section 138:
Provided that the cognizance of a complaint may be taken by the Court after the prescribed period, if the complainant satisfies the Court that he had sufficient cause for not making a complaint within such period;
(c) no court inferior to that of a Metropolitan Magistrate or a Judicial Magistrate of the first class shall try any offence punishable under section 138.
(2) The offence under section 138 shall be inquired into and tried only by a court within whose local jurisdiction,— (a) if the cheque is delivered for collection through an account, the branch of the bank where the payee or holder in due course, as the case may be, maintains the account, is situated; or
(b) if the cheque is presented for payment by the payee or holder in due course, otherwise through an account, the branch of the drawee bank where the drawer maintains the account, is situated.
Explanation.—For the purposes of clause (a), where a cheque is delivered for collection at any branch of the bank of the payee or holder in due course, then, the cheque shall be deemed to have been delivered to the branch of the bank in which the payee or holder in due course, as the case may be, maintains the account.
Key rule and applicability
The written complaint is by the payee or holder in due course. Its one-month period runs from the cause of action under section 138 proviso (c), not directly from the cheque date or bank-return date. Collection through an account uses the payee’s or holder-in-due-course’s account branch; presentation otherwise through an account uses the drawer’s account branch of the drawee bank.
Limits and related provisions
Keep the section 138 demand and payment periods separate from this one-month complaint period; one month should not simply be replaced with 30 days. Late cognizance depends on satisfying the court about sufficient cause. For a real filing, verify the applicable procedural transition, court designation and binding jurisdiction decisions; the quoted consolidated Act retains its CrPC wording.
Hypothetical business example
Hypothetical: a payee deposits a cheque at another branch of its own bank. The explanation points to the branch where the payee maintains the account for the collection-through-account test, rather than making the deposit counter alone decisive. The payee separately prepares its notice-receipt and cause-of-action chronology.
Practical decision flow
Confirm complainant status and retain the written complaint and supporting instrument records.
Calculate the section 138 notice and payment chronology before identifying the section 142 cause-of-action date and one-month period.
Determine the collection route, correct account branch and competent court; examine section 142A if related complaints are pending.
Practical checklist
Do
- Confirm complainant status and retain the written complaint and supporting instrument records.
- Calculate the section 138 notice and payment chronology before identifying the section 142 cause-of-action date and one-month period.
- Determine the collection route, correct account branch and competent court; examine section 142A if related complaints are pending.
Avoid
- Keep the section 138 demand and payment periods separate from this one-month complaint period; one month should not simply be replaced with 30 days. Late cognizance depends on satisfying the court about sufficient cause. For a real filing, verify the applicable procedural transition, court designation and binding jurisdiction decisions; the quoted consolidated Act retains its CrPC wording.
Glossary
- Cognizance
- The court’s taking cognizance of the offence subject to the statutory requirements.
- Cause of action
- The trigger referred to in section 138 proviso (c) for this complaint-period rule.
Frequently asked questions
Is the complaint due one month after the bank return?
The section measures one month from the cause of action under section 138 proviso (c), so the full notice and non-payment chronology matters.
Can a late complaint ever be considered?
The proviso permits cognizance after the period if the complainant satisfies the court that there was sufficient cause for delay.
Does any branch where a cheque is deposited determine jurisdiction?
For collection through an account, the explanation deems delivery to the branch where the payee or holder in due course maintains that account.
Need help applying this provision to your situation?
Contact BizeneedLast updated 10 October 2026