Cheque Bounce (NI Act Section 138): The Process After 2025 Reforms: An Illustrative Scenario in Mumbai

The situation below is a composite illustration, not an account of an actual client matter, and is used here only to show how the law applies to a common set of facts.

The illustrative scenario

The question

The question most people in this position want answered is:

How the general rule applies

In Sanjabij Tari v Kishore S. Borcar (25 Sep 2025, effective 1 Nov 2025), the Supreme Court directed that summons in cheque bounce cases be served by the complainant both by hand (dasti) and electronically (email or WhatsApp, as state rules permit), with the complainant disclosing the accused's contact details on affidavit.

The same ruling directed district courts to set up QR/UPI payment links so an accused can make early payment conveniently, and expressed a preference for summary trial with a mandatory complaint synopsis.

New compounding costs replace the earlier 10/15/20% scale: nil before defence evidence is led; 5% after defence evidence but before judgment; 7.5% at the Sessions Court or High Court on appeal or revision; 10% at the Supreme Court.

Since 1 November 2025, following Sanjabij Tari v Kishore S. Borcar, summons must be served both by hand (dasti) and electronically, such as by email or WhatsApp depending on the relevant state rules, with the complainant providing the accused's contact details on affidavit.

What often gets missed in situations like this

• Missing the 30-day window to send the statutory notice after learning of dishonour.
• Filing the complaint before the 15-day payment window after the notice has expired.
• Assuming settlement is free at any stage — compounding costs apply once defence evidence has been led.

Where this scenario is set (Mumbai)

• The High Court with jurisdiction is the Bombay High Court.
• Matters at the district level are generally handled at the Mumbai City Civil Court, or the Court of Small Causes for tenancy matters.

As noted above, this scenario is a constructed illustration used to explain the general rule — it does not describe a real client, case, or outcome.

For the general rules, see Cheque Bounce (NI Act Section 138): The Process After 2025 Reforms, Recovering Money Owed to You: The Limitation Period and Your Options, and Recovering Delayed Payments as an MSME.

Where this applies to a live matter, it is usually worth discussing it in a consultation before acting.

The content above explains how the law generally works; it is not legal advice and should not be treated as a substitute for advice on your particular facts.