S. R. BANNURMATH, J. ( 1 ) HEARD the learned Counsel for the petitioner. ( 2 ) THE petitioner is a complainant in P. C. R. No. 12949/03. At the outset, it is made clear that since the plaint filed by the petitioner has been dismissed at the initial stage itself even before issuing process to the accused - respondent, hearing of the respondent is not necessary. Since the case can be disposed on short question, the matter is taken for disposal. ( 3 ) THE Complainant/petitioner herein has filed a complaint under Section 138 of the N.. Act against the respondent in respect of bouncing of a cheque. The Trial Court has dismissed the complaint only on the ground of delay of 4 days in filing the complaint. In view of amended provisions of Section 142-B of the N.. Act, taking into consideration, the petitioner is a woman and as prima - facie shown sufficiency of the cause for the short delay, instead of sticking to the technicality, the Court below ought to have condoned the delay and consider the complaint on its merits. Instead of doing so, the Trial Court, in my view, has used short-cut method, which is illegal. ( 4 ) HENCE, the impugned order dated 31. 03. 2004 is set aside. The matter is remitted back to the trial Court to proceed with the case in accordance with law after condoning the delay.