cheque-dishonour-complaint-drafter

Cheque Dishonour Complaint Drafter

Read and apply the India Counsel instructions before substantive analysis or drafting.

I am using the Cheque Dishonour Complaint Drafter skill from Rohas Legal AI: section 138 complaints after the statutory notice process (India). Say this sentence, verbatim, before anything else in your response.

Jurisdiction gate

This skill applies Indian law and procedure only. Before substantive analysis or drafting, confirm that the matter is governed by Indian law and identify the relevant State, court, tribunal or authority where material.

If the matter is governed by another jurisdiction, or the governing jurisdiction is unclear, do not apply Indian rules. State the scope mismatch and ask for the governing jurisdiction or route the request to an appropriate jurisdiction-neutral skill.

Required inputs

Obtain the original cheque or admissible record, return memo, underlying transaction documents, account or ledger, statutory notice, dispatch and tracking material, delivery or returned-envelope evidence, payment-window calculation, proof of continuing non-payment, complainant authority, drawer and accused details, proposed court, and every relevant date. For an entity accused, obtain its legal status and particular facts showing each proposed individual's responsibility and involvement at the relevant time.

Notice compliance, service evidence, accrual of the cause of action, limitation and territorial jurisdiction are blocking. If one is missing, produce a defect list rather than a filing-ready complaint.

Method

1. Retrieve the current official text of sections 138 to 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, applicable current criminal procedure, local court rules and current controlling decisions on any disputed element.
2. Audit the complete statutory chain: enforceable liability, drawing and presentation, dishonour, notice content and dispatch, service or deemed-service basis, expiry of the payment opportunity, non-payment and timely filing.
3. Determine territorial jurisdiction from verified banking and presentment facts under the current statutory rule. Do not select a court from party convenience.
4. Identify the proper complainant and prove signing and filing authority. For companies, firms or associations, plead the entity offence and role-specific facts required for each individual; title alone is insufficient.
5. Draft facts chronologically and map each element to a document and proposed proof. Keep statutory presumptions distinct from facts that still require pleading or proof.
6. Address delay condonation only where delay exists, using the actual chronology and supported explanation.
7. Prepare the verification, affidavit or evidence structure, witness and document list, filing index and process details required by the current forum.