Cheque Bounce Notice Format Under Section 138
October 18, 2026 · 8 min read
The cheque came back from the bank with a return memo that says "funds insufficient" or "payment stopped by drawer". You want your money, and you've heard that a Section 138 notice is the way to get it. It is, but only if you send it on time. A cheque bounce case under the Negotiable Instruments Act runs on four short deadlines, and missing any one of them can end the case before it starts.
This guide covers those deadlines in order, gives you a notice format you can adapt, and explains where to file if the other side still doesn't pay.
The four deadlines, in order
- Present the cheque within three monthsof the date written on it. Section 138 says six months or the cheque's validity, whichever is earlier, and the RBI cut validity to three months in 2012. So three months it is.
- Send the demand notice within 30 days of the day the bank tells you the cheque has been returned. The date on the return memo, or the day you actually received it, is where this count starts.
- The drawer then has 15 days to pay, counted from the day they receive your notice.
- File the complaint within one month after those 15 days run out. This is Section 142(1)(b). A magistrate can accept a late complaint if you show sufficient cause, but you have to ask for it and explain the delay.
A worked example
Say the cheque is dated 5 January 2026. You deposit it on 20 January and the bank hands you the return memo on 23 January.
- Your notice has to go out by 22 February.
- The notice is delivered on 2 March, so the drawer has until 17 March to pay.
- They don't pay. The cause of action arises on 18 March.
- In Saketh India Ltd. v. India Securities Ltd. (1999) the Supreme Court left the day the cause of action arises out of the count, so a complaint filed on 18 April is still in time.
That said, don't plan to file on the last day. Courts do hear arguments about which day the notice was "received", and a week of buffer costs you nothing.
What the notice has to say
There's no form prescribed by law, which is why notices vary so much. What matters is that the drawer can read it and know exactly which cheque, how much, and what happens if they don't pay. Put these in:
- Your name and address, and the drawer's.
- The cheque number, date, amount, and the bank and branch it was drawn on.
- Why the cheque was given: the loan, the invoice, the agreement. One or two sentences is enough.
- When you presented it, when it came back, and the reason printed on the return memo.
- A clear demand to pay the cheque amount within 15 days of receiving the notice.
- A statement that if they don't, you will file a complaint under Section 138.
Many notices also ask for interest and the cost of the notice. That's fine. In Suman Sethi v. Ajay K. Churiwal (2000) the Supreme Court held that extra claims don't make the notice invalid, as long as the cheque amount is stated separately and clearly. Where people get into trouble is a notice that only mentions a larger total and never says what the cheque was for.
A notice format you can adapt
By Registered Post A.D. / Speed Post
Date: [date]
To,
[Drawer's name]
[Full address]
Subject: Legal notice under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, for dishonour of cheque no. [number]
Under instructions from my client, [your name], residing at [address], I give you this notice:
1. You owed my client Rs. [amount] towards [loan given on date / invoice no. / agreement dated], and to pay it you issued cheque no. [number] dated [date] for Rs. [amount], drawn on [bank], [branch].
2. My client presented the cheque on [date]. It was returned unpaid on [date] with the remark "[reason on the memo]". My client received the return memo on [date].
3. You are called upon to pay Rs. [cheque amount] to my client within 15 days of receiving this notice.
4. If you fail to pay within that time, my client will file a complaint against you under Section 138 read with Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, entirely at your risk as to costs and consequences.
[Advocate's name and signature]
[Enrolment no., address, phone]
If you're sending it yourself, not through a lawyer, drop "under instructions from my client" and write in the first person. A notice from the payee is as valid as one from an advocate. If the drawer is a company, address it to the company and to the director or signatory who signed the cheque, since Section 141 lets you proceed against the people in charge.
Want a first draft filled in from your own facts? Law365 can draft a legal notice from a few lines about your case. Read it before you sign it, and check every date against the return memo.
How to send it
Registered post with acknowledgement due, or speed post, to every address you have for the drawer. Keep the postal receipt, print the tracking page once it shows delivered, and keep the returned envelope if it comes back. These are the documents your complaint will lean on. An extra copy by email or WhatsApp doesn't hurt, and it makes "I never got it" harder to say.
Where to file the complaint
Since the 2015 amendment, Section 142(2) settles this: you file before the magistrate where your own bank branch is, the branch that holds the account you paid the cheque into. Before that, the Supreme Court in Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod (2014) had sent cases to the drawer's bank's location, and Parliament reversed it.
The complaint goes with your affidavit, the original cheque, the return memo, a copy of the notice, and the postal proof. The drawer doesn't need to be present when it's filed.
What happens after you file
- The court presumes the cheque was given for a debt or liability (Section 139). It's for the drawer to show otherwise, as the Supreme Court explained in Rangappa v. Sri Mohan (2010).
- The court can order the drawer to pay interim compensation of up to 20% of the cheque amount while the case runs (Section 143A).
- On conviction, the punishment can be up to two years in jail, a fine of up to twice the cheque amount, or both.
- The offence can be settled at any stage (Section 147), and a lot of these cases end that way.
Is it cheating as well?
A bounced cheque isn't cheating by itself. If you can show the person never meant to pay when they handed it over, some complainants also file a police complaint for cheating, which was IPC 420 and is now Section 318(4) of the BNS. That needs dishonest intent from the start, which is harder to prove than a Section 138 case, so treat it as an addition and not a replacement.
If the criminal route is closed, a civil suit to recover the money is still open for three years under the Limitation Act. Which date those three years run from depends on what the money was for, and the limitation calculator gives you the exact last day for the article that fits.
Questions people ask
Can I send a cheque bounce notice by WhatsApp or email?
Section 138 only asks for a notice in writing, and some courts have accepted notices sent by email or WhatsApp. Most lawyers still send it by registered post or speed post as well, because a postal receipt and tracking record is the proof every magistrate is used to seeing. Send the electronic copy as an extra, not instead.
What if the notice comes back unclaimed or refused?
If you sent it to the right address by registered post, the law presumes it was served. In C.C. Alavi Haji v. Palapetty Muhammed (2007) the Supreme Court also said that a drawer who claims they never got the notice can pay the amount within 15 days of receiving the court's summons. If they don't, they can't use non-receipt as a defence.
I missed the 30 days for sending the notice. Is the case gone?
Not always. If the cheque is still within its three-month validity, you can present it again. If it bounces a second time, you get a fresh 30 days to send a notice, and the Supreme Court allowed a case on that second dishonour in MSR Leathers v. S. Palaniappan (2013). Once the cheque has expired, the criminal route is closed and a civil suit for the money is what's left.
Is Section 138 under the IPC or the new BNS?
Neither. Section 138 is in the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, which the new criminal laws did not replace. Section 138 of the old IPC was about abetting a soldier's insubordination, and that has nothing to do with cheques.
This is general information, not legal advice. Check the bare Act and speak to a lawyer before you act on a deadline.
Try this in Law365, free on Google Play.
Get the app