Legal Minute India

Log in

We email you a 6-digit code. No password to remember.

By logging in you accept the terms of use and privacy notice.
Top Stories
Supreme Court
SC Judgements
High Court
Allahabad High CourtAndhra Pradesh High CourtBombay High CourtCalcutta High CourtDelhi High CourtGujarat High CourtKarnataka High CourtKerala High CourtMadhya Pradesh High CourtMadras High CourtManipur High CourtMeghalaya High CourtPatna High CourtPunjab and Haryana High CourtRajasthan High CourtSikkim High CourtTelangana High CourtTripura High Court
ArticlesActsAdvocatesLitigants
LEGAL MINUTE INDIAEvery Supreme Court & High Court judgment, in plain language
Daily articlesEnglish & HindiFull judgment PDFs
@legalminuteindia
Home/Articles/Section 138 NI Act (cheque bounce)

Section 138 NI Act (Cheque Bounce) Judgments Explained

Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 makes it an offence when a cheque given for a legally enforceable debt is returned unpaid by the bank, because the account does not have enough money or because the amount is more than the bank has agreed to pay. This page gathers the Supreme Court and High Court judgments on cheque bounce that we hold. The ones we have written up come with a plain-language explanation.

The usual steps in a cheque bounce case

  1. The cheque is presented to the bank within its validity period.
  2. The bank returns it unpaid and the payee gets the return memo.
  3. The payee sends a written demand notice to the person who gave the cheque, within 30 days of getting the information from the bank.
  4. That person has 15 days from receiving the notice to pay the cheque amount.
  5. If there is no payment, the payee can file a complaint within one month after those 15 days end (Section 142).

If the offence is proved, the law provides imprisonment up to two years, or a fine up to twice the cheque amount, or both. Time limits, notice and the court that can hear the case have been explained, and sometimes changed, by court decisions, so read the judgments below for the exact position.

This is general information, not legal advice.

Explained in plain language

Delhi High CourtSummons Sent To Wrong Address: Delhi High Court Quashes Section 174A IPC FIR Against AccusedThe Delhi High Court quashed a Section 174A IPC FIR, ruling an accused cannot be declared an absconder when summons and warrants were repeatedly sent to an address where he did not reside.Published 10 November 2026

All 54 judgments we hold on this