ValkyaEditorial

Tagged “cognizance”

2 articles on cognizance.

Supreme CourtSupreme Court of India

Yogendra Pratap Singh v. Savitri Pandey (2014): a cheque complaint filed before the 15-day notice period expires is no complaint at all

A three-judge bench held that a Section 138 complaint lodged before the 15-day statutory notice period has run is premature and discloses no cause of action, so no cognizance can be taken — even if the period has lapsed by the time the magistrate acts. The Court allowed a fresh complaint to be filed within a month of its judgment.

Valkya Editorial··6 min
High Court ReferenceHigh Court of Delhi

Dr. Rita Bakshi v. Seema Bajaj (2026): when must a BNSS Magistrate hear the accused?

A single judge of the Delhi High Court has declined to decide, and instead referred to a Larger Bench, a foundational sequencing question under the new BNSS: on a private complaint, must the accused be heard under the first proviso to Section 223(1) before or after the Magistrate examines the complainant on oath. A digest of the facts, the interpretive conflict over when 'cognizance' is taken, and the questions sent up for authoritative resolution.

Valkya Editorial··8 min