top of page

IPC Section 138

IPC Section 138 addresses dishonour of cheque for insufficiency of funds, penalizing the drawer for bounced cheques.

IPC Section 138 deals with the offence committed when a cheque is returned unpaid due to insufficient funds or because it exceeds the amount arranged to be paid from that account. This section is crucial in commercial transactions as it safeguards the interests of payees and promotes trust in banking and financial dealings.

The provision ensures that individuals or entities issuing cheques maintain adequate funds in their accounts. If a cheque bounces, the drawer can face legal consequences, including fines and imprisonment. This helps maintain financial discipline and accountability in business and personal transactions.

IPC Section 138 – Exact Provision

In simple terms, this section makes it a punishable offence if someone issues a cheque that bounces due to insufficient funds or because the cheque amount exceeds the agreed limit. The law holds the drawer responsible and provides a remedy to the payee.

  • Applies when a cheque is dishonoured due to insufficient funds.

  • Protects payees from financial loss caused by bounced cheques.

  • Imposes criminal liability on the drawer of the cheque.

  • Requires prior notice to the drawer before legal action.

  • Promotes trust in banking and commercial transactions.

Purpose of IPC Section 138

The main objective of IPC Section 138 is to ensure financial discipline and protect the interests of payees in cheque transactions. It acts as a deterrent against issuing cheques without sufficient funds, thereby reducing fraudulent financial practices. This provision encourages responsible banking behavior and helps maintain the credibility of negotiable instruments.

  • To penalize the drawer for issuing dishonoured cheques.

  • To safeguard the rights of the payee and maintain trust.

  • To promote accountability in financial dealings.

Cognizance under IPC Section 138

Cognizance of an offence under Section 138 is generally taken by the court only after the payee has issued a legal notice to the drawer. The notice must be sent within 30 days of receiving information about the cheque's dishonour. The court then proceeds if the drawer fails to make the payment within 15 days of receiving the notice.

  • Notice to drawer must be sent within 30 days of cheque dishonour.

  • Court takes cognizance only after notice and non-payment.

  • Complaint must be filed within one month after the expiry of 15 days from notice.

Bail under IPC Section 138

The offence under Section 138 is non-bailable but compoundable. This means the accused cannot claim bail as a matter of right, but the parties can settle the matter amicably and withdraw the complaint. Courts often grant bail depending on the circumstances and the accused's conduct.

  • Non-bailable offence but compoundable.

  • Bail granted at court's discretion based on facts.

  • Settlement between parties can lead to withdrawal of complaint.

Triable By (Which Court Has Jurisdiction?)

Cases under IPC Section 138 are triable by a Magistrate Court. The jurisdiction is usually based on the place where the cheque was presented or where the offence occurred. Sessions Courts do not have jurisdiction unless the case is committed for trial due to its nature.

  • Trial by Magistrate Court.

  • Jurisdiction based on cheque presentation location.

  • Sessions Court only if case is committed for trial.

Example of IPC Section 138 in Use

Suppose Mr. A issues a cheque of ₹50,000 to Mr. B for payment of goods. When Mr. B deposits the cheque, it is returned unpaid due to insufficient funds in Mr. A's account. Mr. B sends a legal notice within 30 days demanding payment. Mr. A fails to pay within 15 days of receiving the notice. Mr. B then files a complaint under Section 138. If Mr. A pays the amount before the trial, the case may be withdrawn. Otherwise, Mr. A may face penalties including imprisonment or fine.

In contrast, if Mr. A had sufficient funds and the cheque bounced due to a bank error, Section 138 would not apply, and no offence would be committed.

Historical Relevance of IPC Section 138

Section 138 was introduced to address the increasing misuse of cheques in commercial transactions. It was added to the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, to provide a criminal remedy for cheque dishonour, which was earlier treated only as a civil matter.

  • Introduced as part of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

  • Amended in 1988 to strengthen cheque dishonour provisions.

  • Landmark cases like

    K. Bhaskaran v. Sankaran Vaidhyan

    clarified its scope.

Modern Relevance of IPC Section 138

In 2025, IPC Section 138 remains vital in maintaining financial discipline amid digital and cashless transactions. Courts have interpreted the section to cover electronic cheques and ensure swift justice. It also plays a role in curbing financial fraud and promoting trust in banking systems.

  • Applicable to electronic and digital cheque transactions.

  • Court rulings emphasize timely notice and strict compliance.

  • Supports financial integrity in modern commerce.

Related Sections to IPC Section 138

  • Section 139 – Presumption in favour of holder in due course.

  • Section 141 – Offences by companies.

  • Section 142 – Cognizance of offences.

  • Section 143 – Power to arrest without warrant.

  • Section 147 – Offences by partners.

Case References under IPC Section 138

  1. K. Bhaskaran v. Sankaran Vaidhyan (1999 AIR 376, SC)

    – The Supreme Court held that the drawer must be given a reasonable opportunity to make payment before prosecution.

  2. R. Gandhi v. State of Tamil Nadu (2004 AIR 686, SC)

    – The Court clarified the importance of sending legal notice within 30 days of cheque dishonour.

  3. Dr. C.K. Raju v. State of Tamil Nadu (2001 AIR 1101, SC)

    – Emphasized the necessity of filing complaint within one month after notice period.

Key Facts Summary for IPC Section 138

  • Section:

    138

  • Title:

    Dishonour of Cheque

  • Offence Type:

    Non-bailable; Cognizable

  • Punishment:

    Imprisonment up to 2 years, or fine, or both

  • Triable By:

    Magistrate Court

Conclusion on IPC Section 138

IPC Section 138 plays a critical role in the Indian legal system by addressing the issue of cheque dishonour. It protects the rights of payees and ensures that drawers maintain sufficient funds before issuing cheques. This provision fosters trust and reliability in financial transactions, which is essential for economic growth.

With evolving banking practices and digital payments, Section 138 continues to be relevant and is interpreted to cover new forms of negotiable instruments. Its enforcement promotes accountability and discourages fraudulent financial behavior, making it a cornerstone of commercial law in India.

FAQs on IPC Section 138

What is the main offence under IPC Section 138?

The offence involves issuing a cheque that is returned unpaid due to insufficient funds or exceeding the arranged amount, making the drawer liable for penalties.

Is IPC Section 138 offence bailable?

No, it is a non-bailable offence but compoundable, allowing parties to settle and withdraw the complaint.

What is the time limit to send notice after cheque dishonour?

The payee must send a legal notice to the drawer within 30 days of receiving information about the cheque's dishonour.

Which court tries offences under Section 138?

Cases are triable by a Magistrate Court, usually where the cheque was presented or the offence occurred.

Can the drawer avoid punishment by paying after notice?

Yes, if the drawer pays the cheque amount within 15 days of receiving the notice, the complaint may be withdrawn, avoiding prosecution.

Related Sections

Is 10 Cric legal in India? Understand its legal status, regulations, and enforcement regarding online sports betting in India.

Tapping of phone is conditionally legal in India under strict government authorization and legal safeguards.

In India, dating a 16-year-old is legal but sexual activity is restricted until 18, with strict laws protecting minors from exploitation.

Contract Act 1872 Section 36 explains when a contract becomes void due to impossibility of performance.

In India, recording meetings is legal with consent; understand consent rules, exceptions, and enforcement realities.

IPC Section 465 defines punishment for forgery, covering making false documents with intent to cause harm or fraud.

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 52 defines the liability of the acceptor of a bill of exchange upon dishonour by non-acceptance.

Killing cows in India is largely illegal due to state laws protecting cattle, with strict penalties in many states.

IPC Section 160 empowers police officers to enter any public place to search for a person suspected of committing an offence.

Running a dating website in India is legal with compliance to IT laws and content regulations.

CrPC Section 355 empowers police to disperse unlawful assemblies to maintain public peace and order.

CrPC Section 470 deals with the procedure when a person is tried for an offence not punishable under the law.

IPC Section 133 empowers authorities to disperse unlawful assemblies to maintain public peace and order.

Learn about the legality of Predict and Win games in India, including regulations, enforcement, and common misunderstandings.

IPC Section 382 defines punishment for robbery, covering theft with violence or threat to cause harm.

IT Act Section 6 defines the scope and territorial jurisdiction of the Act over offences committed using computers and networks.

Child marriages are illegal in India under the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, with strict penalties for violations.

Evidence Act 1872 Section 83 defines the presumption of death when a person has been missing for seven years, aiding proof in civil and criminal cases.

GHB is illegal in India with strict penalties for possession, sale, and use under narcotics laws.

Companies Act 2013 Section 79 governs the appointment and powers of the Company Secretary in Indian companies.

IPC Section 431 punishes mischief by fire or explosive substance with intent to cause damage to property.

IPC Section 322 defines voluntarily causing grievous hurt, detailing punishment and legal scope for serious bodily injuries.

Albino Burmese pythons are illegal to own in India due to wildlife protection laws and strict enforcement.

Evidence Act 1872 Section 54 defines the admissibility of confessions made by accused persons, crucial for criminal trials and fair justice.

Sologamy is not legally recognized in India; marrying yourself has no legal status or rights under Indian law.

IPC Section 376A punishes causing death or resulting in persistent vegetative state during rape, ensuring strict accountability.

IPC Section 86 covers the offence of making a false claim to a railway servant, ensuring safety and honesty in railway operations.

bottom of page