rajan chopra 06 November 2023

SECTION 319 CR.P.C

SIR IN COMPLAINT U/S 138 NI ACT ON BOUNCED CHEQUE ISSUED BY ACCUSED AND HER HUSBAND BOTH SIGNATORIES OF CHEQUE AND JOINT ACCOUNT HOLDER I ISSUED NOTICE TO ONLY ACCUSED AND NO TO HER HUSBAND DUE TO NAME OF ACCUSED WAS APPEARING FIRST IN HER BANK ACCOUNT NOW I HAVE FILED AN APPLICATION U/S 319 CR.P.C TO IMPLEAD HUSBAND OF ACCUSED AS ACCUSED NO. 2
WOULD MY APPLICATION BE MAINTAINABLE AS I HAD NOT ISSUED NOTICE TO HUSBAND OF ACCUSED ?

Reply Follow

Quick Summary

This discussion explores the maintainability of an application under Section 319 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) to implead a husband as a second accused in a cheque bounce case. The original complaint was filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, with notice issued only to the wife, who was the first signatory and account holder. The question arises whether the husband, a joint account holder and co-signatory, can be added later when he wasn't initially served notice, with legal opinions suggesting notice is generally required for both parties and Section 319 CrPC might not be applicable in this scenario.

3 Replies

Rama chary Rachakonda (Secunderabad/Telangana state Highcourt practice watsapp no.9989324294 ) 07 November 2023

Notice is a must for both acccused

T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate (Advocate) 07 November 2023

Merely it is a joint account will not make the husband liable for any debt.

The cheque bounce case filed against the person who issued the cheque under the signature shall only be liable until and unless the other person is involved in this act.