Power of Court to try cases summarily
Section 143 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 deals with power of Court to try cases summarily. Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) all offences under this Chapter shall be tried by a Judicial Magistrate of the first class or by a Metropolitan Magistrate and the provisions of sections 262 to 265 (both inclusive) of the said Code shall, as far The Act came into force on 01 Mar 1882.
1[143. Power of Court to try cases summarily.--(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) all offences under this Chapter shall be tried by a Judicial Magistrate of the first class or by a Metropolitan Magistrate and the provisions of sections 262 to 265 (both inclusive) of the said Code shall, as far as may be, apply to such trials:
Provided that in the case of any conviction in a summary trial under this section, it shall be lawful for the Magistrate to pass a sentence of imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year and an amount of fine exceeding five thousand rupees:
Provided further that when at the commencement of, or in the course of, a summary trial under this section, it appears to the Magistrate that the nature of the case is such that a sentence of imprisonment for a term exceeding one year may have to be passed or that it is, for any other reason, undesirable to try the case summarily, the Magistrate shall after hearing the parties, record an order to that effect and thereafter recall any witness who may have been examined and proceed to hear or rehear the case in the manner provided by the said Code.
(2) The trial of a case under this section shall, so far as practicable, consistently with the interests of justice, be continued from day to day until its conclusion, unless the Court finds the adjournment of the trial beyond the following day to be necessary for reasons to be recorded in writing.
(3) Every trial under this section shall be conducted as expeditiously as possible and an endeavour shall be made to conclude the trial within six months from the date of filing of the complaint.]
Section 143, The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (Act 26 of 1881).
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Meters and Instruments Private Limited v. Kanchan Mehta
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Judgment of Main Case order-3.pdf 2017-10-05. Crl.A. 1731/2017 (with 1732-1733). A.K. Goel / U.U. Lalit. Digitally signed 2017.10.06. DATE-CHECK false positive (2017-04-21 HC / 2016-07-15 complaint / 2016-03-31 cheque fact dates); body is the named 5 Oct 2017 reportable. Isolates NI 143: summary trial is the normal mode; the Magistrate has an implied power to close/discharge when the cheque amount plus reasonable interest and costs have been paid (s.143 read with the compensatory object and CrPC 258 principle). Also discusses 147 but map 143 only (147 filled by Damodar). Do not pad ni-act 138.
On this section: NI 143 makes summary trial the normal mode; the Magistrate may close/discharge when the cheque plus reasonable interest and costs have been paid (Meters and Instruments). Do not pad ni-act 138 or 147 (147 filled by Damodar).
-
Madhav Saran Agarwal vs Msx Mall Pvt. LTD
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Section 138/141 proceedings under the Negotiable Instruments Act against a corporate debtor are covered by the moratorium provision in Section 14(1)(a) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, as such proceedings relate to transactions evidencing debt of the corporate debtor and result in depletion of its assets through compensation orders, thereby directly impacting the object of the moratorium which is to preserve the corporate debtor's assets during the insolvency resolution process so it can continue as a going concern and be rehabilitated. However, the moratorium applies only to the corporate debtor and not to natural persons (Directors/officers) in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the business of the corporate debtor, who remain liable to prosecution under Section 138/141 as the corporate debtor is a necessary party to such proceedings.
On this section: Cited to show magistrate can impose fine exceeding Rs. 5000 in summary trial; fine linked to cheque amount
-
Naresh Kumar Gupta vs Sood Resins and Polymers
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Section 138/141 proceedings under the Negotiable Instruments Act against a corporate debtor are covered by the moratorium provision in Section 14(1)(a) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, as such proceedings are 'proceedings' within the meaning of that section. The moratorium applies only to the corporate debtor and not to natural persons (Directors and officers) who can continue to be prosecuted under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The rules of statutory construction (noscitur a sociis and ejusdem generis) cannot be applied to restrict the meaning of 'proceedings' in Section 14(1)(a) when the expression is designedly wide and the object of the statute is clear - which is to preserve the corporate debtor's assets during the insolvency resolution process.
On this section: Analyzed to show that fine can exceed Rs. 5000 and can extend to twice the cheque amount
-
Tanaji Dinkar Wadakar vs Veer Chaphekar Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Ltd.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The non-obstante clause in Section 143(1) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 confers independent jurisdiction on a Judicial Magistrate of the First Class to conduct summary trials of offences under Chapter XVII of the Act without requiring special empowerment by the High Court under Section 260(1)(c) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The second proviso to Section 143(1) permitting conversion to warrant trial can only be invoked when it appears that imprisonment exceeding one year may be imposed or for other reasons it is undesirable to try summarily, and such order must be passed after hearing the parties and recording reasons. At the pre-trial stage, absent such circumstances, a Magistrate is justified in rejecting an application for warrant trial.
On this section: Core provision establishing the framework for trial of NI Act offences; contains non-obstante clause conferring jurisdiction on Magistrates to conduct summary trials; second proviso provides conditions for conversion to warrant trial
-
Daljeet Singh Chandok vs State
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In cheque dishonour cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the High Court should not exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to quash summoning orders at the threshold stage, especially when there is inordinate delay in challenging the order. The accused should be allowed to defend themselves in the trial court, and the trial court should dispose of the matter expeditiously in accordance with the legislative intent of the 2002 amendments. The inherent powers of the High Court should not be exercised to stifle legitimate prosecution or to allow accused to escape trial through premature High Court petitions.
On this section: Trial court must make efforts to conclude trial within 6 months. The court cited this provision as part of the 2002 amendments aimed at curbing delays in cheque dishonour cases.
-
Jiyaul Haq Alias Jamshed vs State of U.p.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, which are summary proceedings governed by Sections 262-265 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the provisions of Section 258 CrPC (which provides for stopping proceedings in certain cases and applies only to summon cases trial under Chapter XX of CrPC) are not applicable. Consequently, an accused cannot be discharged from a Section 138 NI Act proceeding merely on the ground of partial repayment of the cheque amount, as Chapter XXI of CrPC (Summary Trial) contains no provision to stop the summary trial or discharge the accused.
On this section: Specifies that offences under Chapter XVII (Sections 138-147) shall be tried by Judicial Magistrate First Class or Metropolitan Magistrate, and Sections 262-265 CrPC shall apply to such trials
-
Lalaso Rangrao Pawar vs Mahesh Annasaheb Kupade
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a trial under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is conducted as a regular criminal case rather than as a summary trial, with evidence recorded through affidavits and lengthy cross-examination rather than in the summary manner prescribed, the transfer of the magistrate does not mandate a de novo trial. The requirement for de novo trial under the Nitinbhai principle applies only when the trial has been properly conducted as a summary trial and both parties have filed pursis indicating no objection to proceeding on the basis of evidence already recorded.
On this section: Establishes that every trial under Section 138 is a summary trial and must be conducted as such
-
Ajay Kumar Singh vs State of U.p. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Subordinate courts are duty-bound to adhere to the statutory timelines for NI Act trials and must employ all available coercive measures to prevent the accused from stalling proceedings through non-appearance.
On this section: Mandates that trials for cheque bounce cases should ideally conclude within six months.
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Questions about Section 143
What have the courts held on Section 143 of the Negotiable Instruments Act?
Meters and Instruments Private Limited v. Kanchan Mehta (05 Oct 2017) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: NI 143 makes summary trial the normal mode; the Magistrate may close/discharge when the cheque plus reasonable interest and costs have been paid (Meters and Instruments). Do not pad ni-act 138 or 147 (147 filled by Damodar). Another 7 judgments on this section are set out below, 3 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2006 to 2026.
How do I find court cases under Section 143 of the Negotiable Instruments Act?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: NI Act 143, section 143 NI Act, section 143 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. People searching for it also type ni act 143a and ni act 143 a in hindi. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 8 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Meters and Instruments Private Limited v. Kanchan Mehta (05 Oct 2017).
When did Section 143 of the Negotiable Instruments Act come into force?
Section 143 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, cited as NI Act 143, came into force on 01 Mar 1882, having been enacted on 09 Dec 1881. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 138. Dishonour of cheque for insufficiency, etc., of funds in the account312 words
- 142A. Validation for transfer of pending cases299 words
- 143A. Power to direct interim compensation291 words
- 142. Cognizance of offences290 words
- 141. Offences by companies287 words
- 84. When cheque not duly presented and drawer damaged thereby279 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 14 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.