In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ...... Criminal Misc. No.M-20755 of 2010 ..... Date of decision:26.7.2010 S.B. Khan alias S.U. Khan .....Petitioner v. M/s Super Bright Steels .....Respondent .... Present: Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. ..... S.S. Saron, J. The criminal miscellaneous petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking quashing of the impugned order dated 16.4.2009 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Faridabad whereby the learned Magistrate has allowed the correction of the cheque number in the complaint (Annexure-P.1) filed by the respondent M/s Super Bright Steels. The respondent filed a complaint (Annexure-P.1) under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (`Act' – for short) alleging that the respondent had supplied steel worth Rs.1,50,000/- to the petitioner and for discharge of his liability issued a cheque bearing No.652552 dated 16.3.2007 for an amount of Rs.40,000/- drawn on Vijaya Bank, NIT, Faridabad. The said cheque on presentation was returned with the endorsement “exceeds arrangements”. Accordingly, it was alleged that the petitioner had committed an offence under Section 138 of the Act. The learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class vide order dated 2.5.2007 (Annexure- P.2) summoned the petitioner to face proceedings for the said offence. The Cr. Misc. No.M-20755 of 2010 [2] respondent realizing that there was a typographical mistake in the number of the cheque that was mentioned in the complaint (Annexure-P.1) filed an application dated 24.9.2008 (Annexure-P.3) for correcting the cheque number as 652556 instead of 652552. The petitioner filed a reply (Annexure-P.4) to the said application. The learned trial Magistrate vide order dated 16.4.2009 (Annexure-P.5) has allowed the amendment and corrected the cheque number as 652556 instead of 652552. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that in case of defect in the number of the cheque mentioned in the complaint (Annexure- P.1) the complainant-respondent is liable to suffer for the defect and the Magistrate could not order the correction of the defect. Learned counsel cites V.K. Gupta v. Manjit Kaur, 2008 (3) RCR (Cr.) 430 (P&H). I have given my thoughtful consideration to the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and gone through the record. The case is simple one where the learned trial Magistrate has allowed the correction of a typographical error in the number of the cheque mentioned in the complaint (Annexure-P.1). The actual number of the cheque which has been dishonoured is 652556 whereas in the complaint it was mentioned 652552. The last digit “6” was inadvertently typed as “2”. Therefore, even if it is taken that the learned trial Magistrate has no jurisdiction to correct the mistake, it is not disputed that this Court in exercise of inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can correct the same. In fact, in V.K. Gupta v. Manjit Kaur (supra) it was held that High Court in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction can correct such a mistake. Therefore, the matter being quite trivial in nature and only correction of a typographical mistake is sought, this Court in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction can allow the Cr. Misc. No.M-20755 of 2010 [3] correction and cheque number mentioned in the complaint instead of 652552 shall be corrected and read as 652556. In V.K. Gupta v. Manjit Kaur (supra) the complainant had mentioned wrong date of presentation of cheque and date of dishonour of cheque. The said wrong averments may have effect for the purpose of calculating the period of limitation during which certain proceedings are to be initiated, which may result in defeating a right having accrued to the respondent in the complaint and which may result in his prejudice. However, there is no such right which has accrued to the petitioner by wrong mentioning the cheque number. In the circumstances, no ground for interference with the impugned order is made out and the criminal miscellaneous petition is disposed of by correcting the cheque number in the manner indicated above. July 26, 2010. (S.S. Saron) Judge *hsp*