Shillong, March 17: The High Court of Meghalaya on March 16 dismissed a criminal petition challenging a summons issued in a cheque dishonour case, holding that Section 223 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita does not apply to proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881.
The petitioner, Banteilang Nongmalieh, had challenged a show cause notice issued by the Chief Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nongpoh, in Ri-Bhoi district in connection with a complaint filed by Bendar Rani under Section 138 of the NI Act.
The petitioner argued that the Magistrate failed to comply with Section 223 of the BNSS, which mandates providing an opportunity of hearing before taking cognisance of a complaint. It was contended that such non-compliance warranted quashing of the summons and the proceedings.
Counsel for the respondent countered that the NI Act, being a special law, overrides the general procedural provisions of the BNSS, and therefore Section 223 is not applicable in such cases.
Chief Justice Revati Mohite Dere, who presided over the matter, upheld this position. The court referred to the Karnataka High Court ruling in Ashok v. Fayaz Aahmad (2025), which held that there is no requirement to provide a hearing to the accused before taking cognisance under the NI Act.
The court also noted that the Supreme Court of India had endorsed this view in Sanjabij Tari v. Kishore S. Borcar & Anr (2025), clarifying that summons under Section 223 of the BNSS are not required at the pre-cognisance stage in such cases.
Rejecting the petitioner’s argument that the Supreme Court ruling should apply prospectively, the High Court observed that the BNSS is procedural in nature and that the settled legal position does not support such a contention.
Finding no merit in the plea, the court declined to interfere with the Magistrate’s order and dismissed the petition, while keeping all issues on the merits of the case open for adjudication.
