Supreme Court of India Judgements

46670 Judgements hosted as on 9/12/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Cheque Dishonour

S.138 NI Act | Availability Of Funds In Other Bank Accounts Not A Defence; Cheque Dishonour Relates To Specific Account

Bysclaw

Dec 9, 2023

“In a proceeding under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the accused cannot rely upon other bank accounts for the dishonoured cheque which relates to specific bank account of the accused,”

1
ITEM NO.37 COURT NO.7 SECTION II-B
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) Diary No(s).44330/2023
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 12-10-2023
in CRR No. 3456/2019 passed by the High Court Of Punjab & Haryana
At Chandigarh)
HARPAL SINGH Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF HARYANA & ANR. Respondent(s)
( IA No.244404/2023-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED
JUDGMENT and IA No.244405/2023-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN REFILING /
CURING THE DEFECTS and IA No.244403/2023-PERMISSION TO FILE
ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES )
Date : 04-12-2023 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HRISHIKESH ROY
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KAROL
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Maninder Singh, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Vaibhav Manu Srivastava, AOR
Mr. Apoorv Agarwal, Adv.
Mr. Maitreya Saha, Adv.
Ms. Riya Thomas, Adv.

For Respondent(s) Mr. Himanshu Sharma, AOR
Mr. Lokesh Solanki, Adv.
Mr. Prateek Bajaj, Adv.
Ms. Muskan Chauhan, Adv.

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Delay condoned.
2. Heard Mr. Maninder Singh, learned Senior Counsel appearing for
the petitioner.
3. The counsel would submit that the concerned bank account was
frozen by the police on 10.03.2015 and therefore the petitioner

should not face conviction for the offence, under Section 138 of
the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881.
4. However, it is seen from the impugned judgment itself that
although ten cheques totaling a sum of Rupees Eighty Lakhs was
issued by the petitioner, at the relevant point of time, the
concerned bank account had maximum deposit of Rs. 18,52,033/-. This
would indicate that the benefit of the judgment relied upon by the
petitioner to point out his incapacity in operating the bank
account, will not aid the petitioner.
5. The Senior Counsel would then refer to the funds available
with the petitioner in different bank accounts, as shown from
Annexure P-12, to say that the petitioner had sufficient balance in
those bank accounts.
6. In a proceeding under Section 138 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act, the accused cannot rely upon other bank accounts
for the dishonoured cheque which relates to specific bank account
of the accused. Accordingly, the argument advanced by Mr. Maninder
Singh, learned Senior Counsel of having adequate funds by reference
to the other bank accounts of the company, cannot be of any
assistance to the accused. The Special Leave Petition is therefore
found devoid of merit and the same is dismissed.
7. Pending application(s), if any, also stand closed.
(DEEPAK JOSHI) (KAMLESH RAWAT)
COURT MASTER (SH) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

By sclaw

Related Post

Banking Cheque Dishonour

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 143A — Supreme Court upheld the decision of the Bombay High Court regarding the interpretation of Section 143A of the Act 1881 — The High Court had held that an authorized signatory of a company is not a “drawer” of a cheque within the meaning of Section 143A of the NI Act —The Supreme Court analyzed the provisions of the NI Act and the legal precedents on the subject, and concluded that the primary liability for an offence under Section 138 of the NI Act lies with the company itself, and the company’s management is only subsequently and vicariously liable — Therefore, it is only the company that is to be considered as the “drawer” of the cheque.

Aug 18, 2024 sclaw
Cheque Dishonour

Burden of Proof in Section 138 N.I. Act Cases — The court reaffirmed that once the issuance of a cheque and its dishonor for insufficiency of funds are established, a presumption arises under Sections 138, 139, and 118(a) of the N.I. Act that the amount mentioned in the cheque was legally due and payable by the drawer to the payee — The burden then shifts to the accused to rebut this presumption by producing satisfactory evidence.

Aug 18, 2024 sclaw
Acquittal Cheque Dishonour

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 138 — The appellant lent Rs. 2,00,000 to the respondent, who issued a cheque as a guarantee — The cheque was dishonored due to insufficient funds — Whether the respondent committed an offence under Section 138 of the Act, 1881 and Section 420 of the IPC — The appellant argued that the respondent failed to repay the loan and intentionally cheated him — The respondent claimed the cheque was issued for security purposes to a third party and denied the loan transaction — The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the High Court’s judgment that favored the respondent’s acquittal — The court found contradictions in the appellant’s statements and lack of evidence regarding the loan transaction — The court emphasized the presumption under Section 139 of the NI Act, 1881, and the burden on the respondent to rebut it — The appeal was dismissed, and the respondent’s acquittal was upheld.

Aug 11, 2024 sclaw

Leave a Reply

You missed

C P C

A party should not suffer due to the negligence of their counsel, and a restoration application under Order IX Rule 13 of the CPC can serve as an application for condonation of delay if it explains the reasons for the delay, so that courts should focus on the merits of a case rather than being hindered by procedural technicalities A. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 9 Rule 13 — An application under Order 9 Rule 13 can also serve as an application for condonation of delay — The court cites Bhagmal and Ors Vs. Kunwar Lal and Others, to support its finding that where the delay in filing an application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the CPC is explained within the application itself, there is no need for a separate application for condonation of delay — The court emphasizes that the procedure is a handmaid of justice, and hyper-technical interpretations of rules should not stand in the way of achieving a just outcome.

Dec 28, 2024 sclaw
Anticipatory Bail

Anticipatory bail should not be granted routinely, especially in serious offenses like murder, and that courts must consider the severity of the charges, the evidence, and the materials on record, including the charge sheet Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 302 — Murder — The Supreme Court overturned the Patna High Court’s decision to grant anticipatory bail to respondents in a murder case — The case originated from an incident where the appellant’s nephew was allegedly set on fire by the respondents — The court emphasized that anticipatory bail should not be granted mechanically, particularly in severe offenses like murder, and the High Court had erred in not considering the gravity of the charges and the evidence, including the charge sheet which stated that the case against the accused persons was found to be true — The Supreme Court directed the respondents to surrender to the trial court and apply for regular bail, to be considered on its merits — The Supreme Court’s decision underscores the importance of a thorough review of case details and allegations before granting anticipatory bail, especially in cases of serious crimes.

Dec 28, 2024 sclaw
Service

Service Law — Regularization of services for long-term, part-time employees — The court found that the appellants’ continuous service for over a decade, performing essential duties, should not be disregarded simply because their initial appointments were labeled as part-time or contractual — The court noted the indispensable nature of their work, the lack of any performance issues, and that their duties were similar to those of regular employees — The court emphasized that the nature of their work was perennial and fundamental, requiring their classification as regular posts — The court also found that the appellants’ abrupt termination was unjustified and violated principles of natural justice, and the argument against their regularization based on educational qualifications was untenable — The court noted discriminatory practices as other employees with similar or shorter service had been regularized — The court clarified that the Uma Devi judgment was not intended to penalize employees who have served long years in essential roles and that “irregular” appointments should be considered for regularization, especially when they are not “illegal” and the employees have served continuously against sanctioned functions.

Dec 28, 2024 sclaw
Child Custody Matrimonial

For best interest and welfare of the child are the paramount considerations when determining visitation rights A. Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 26 — Visitation Rights — The paramount consideration when determining visitation rights is the best interest and welfare of the child — This principle takes precedence over the rights of the parents — The court emphasizes that a child’s health and well-being must not be compromised in the process of adjudicating parental rights. B. Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 26 — Visitation Rights — Both parents have a right to the care, company, and affection of their child — However, this right is not absolute and must be balanced with the need to protect the child’s welfare — In this case, the court acknowledges the father’s right to visit his daughter but ensures that these visits do not negatively impact the child. C. Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 26 — Visitation Rights — Matrimonial disputes and serious allegations between parents should not impede a child’s right to the care and company of both parents — The court separates the child’s welfare from the conflict between the parents. D. Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 26 — Visitation Rights — Visitation arrangements must not cause undue hardship to the child — The court modified the High Court’s order, which required the child to travel 300 kilometers every Sunday, as it was deemed detrimental to the child’s health and well-being. E. Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 26 — Visitation Rights — The location for visitation must be convenient and in the best interest of the child — The court changed the visitation location from Karur to Madurai, which is closer to the child’s residence, in order to prioritize the child’s comfort and convenience. F. Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 26 — Visitation Rights — Supervised visitation may be necessary, especially for young children — The court directed that the father’s visits should occur in a public place, with the mother present (though at a distance), due to the child’s young age and unfamiliarity with the father.

Dec 28, 2024 sclaw