K.SATYANARAYAN vs MADHUR

The Supreme Court held that for a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 to be maintainable, the conditions specified in the proviso must be satisfied, including the requirement of serving a notice to the accused. In this case, the appellant was not served such notice, leading to the conclusion that the Magistrate committed a jurisdictional error in summoning him as an additional accused under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C. The Court set aside the impugned judgment of the High Court and allowed the appeal.