Category: Cheque Dishonour

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 β€” Section 138 β€” Dishonour of Cheque β€” Separate Causes of Action β€” Quashing of Complaint under Section 482 Cr.P.C. β€” Where multiple cheques are issued in relation to the same underlying liability, but are distinct instruments (drawn on different accounts, presented on different dates, and dishonoured separately), each dishonour gives rise to a separate cause of action under Section 138 NI Act β€” The fact that two complaints relate to the same transaction does not bar parallel prosecution, especially where the statutory requirements of presentation, dishonour, notice, and non-payment are fulfilled separately for each instrument β€” High Court erred in quashing one complaint on the ground that two parallel prosecutions for the same underlying liability amounted to an abuse of process of law, as this violated the principle of separate cause of action for distinct cheque instruments. (Paras 33, 35, 45(a))

2026 INSC 40 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SUMIT BANSAL Vs. M/S MGI DEVELOPERS AND PROMOTERS AND ANOTHER ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Prashant Kumar Mishra, JJ. )…

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) β€” Section 482 β€” Inherent powers of High Court β€” Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 β€” Section 138 (Dishonour of cheque for insufficiency of funds) β€” Quashing of criminal proceedings β€” Scope of inquiry at pre-trial stage β€” When complaint discloses all necessary ingredients of Section 138 of N.I. Act, High Court should not conduct a roving inquiry into disputed questions of fact, such as whether the cheque was issued for the discharge of a legally enforceable debt or liability, especially in light of the statutory presumption under Section 139 of the N.I. Act β€” Quashing of complaint at the threshold by the High Court by appreciating evidence/materials is unwarranted where a prima facie case is made out.

2025 INSC 1474 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S SRI OM SALES Vs. ABHAY KUMAR @ ABHAY PATEL AND ANOTHER ( Before : Manoj Misra and Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ.…

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 β€” Section 138, Section 142(2), Section 142A β€” Territorial Jurisdiction for cheque dishonour cases (post-2015 Amendment) β€” Account Payee Cheques β€” Jurisdiction for complaints under Section 138 concerning cheques ‘delivered for collection through an account’ (Account Payee Cheques) lies exclusively with the court having local jurisdiction over the branch of the bank where the payee maintains the account (payee’s home branch) β€” This position is anchored in Section 142(2)(a) read with its Explanation β€” The legal fiction in the Explanation deems a cheque delivered at any branch of the payee’s bank to have been delivered at the payee’s home branch for jurisdictional purposes, overriding the actual place of delivery. (Paras 39, 54, 58, 59, 76)

2025 INSC 1362 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH JAI BALAJI INDUSTRIES LTD. AND OTHERS Vs. M/S HEG LTD. ( Before : J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, JJ. ) Transfer…

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 β€” Section 138 β€” Dishonour of cheque β€” Quashing of proceedings β€” Cheques issued as security and not for consideration β€” Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) clearly stated cheques were for security purposes to show banks and not for deposit β€” Complainant failed to read the complete terms of MOU in isolation and misinterpreted it to claim cheques were converted into debt β€” Court empowered to consider unimpeachable documents at pre-trial stage to prevent injustice β€” Complaints under Section 138 NI Act liable to be quashed.

2025 INSC 1270 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH K. NAGENDRA Vs. THE NEW INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND OTHERS ( Before : Sanjay Karol and Prashant Kumar Mishra, JJ.…

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 β€” Section 138 and 141 β€” Dishonour of Cheque β€” Complaint against Chairman/Trustee of a Trust without impleading the Trust as an accused β€” Maintainability β€” Held, a complaint under Section 138 of the NI Act is maintainable against a Trustee who has signed the cheque on behalf of the Trust, even if the Trust itself is not made an accused β€” The Trust does not possess independent legal status to sue or be sued.

2025 INSC 1210 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SANKAR PADAM THAPA Vs. VIJAYKUMAR DINESHCHANDRA AGARWAL ( Before : Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Prashant Kumar Mishra, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No…..of…

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 β€” Sections 138, 139, 118 β€” Dishonour of cheque β€” Presumptions β€” Scope β€” Once execution/signature admitted, presumption arises that cheque was for consideration and discharge of legally enforceable debt β€” Burden initially on accused to rebut by raising probable defence β€” Mere plea of complainant’s financial incapacity, without documentary or independent evidence, not sufficient β€” Failure to reply to statutory notice, an adverse inference against accused β€” Defence that blank signed cheque given for obtaining bank loan, held unbelievable.

2025 INSC 1158 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SANJABIJ TARI Vs. KISHORE S. BORCAR AND ANOTHER ( Before : Manmohan and N.V. Anjaria, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No. 1755…

. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 β€” Sections 138, 141, 142, Proviso (b) β€” Dishonour of Cheque β€” Demand Notice β€” Validity β€” Requirement of notice to demand the “said amount of money” β€” “Said amount of money” refers to the cheque amount itself β€” Demand for an amount different from the cheque amount invalidates the notice β€” Typographical errors in the amount are not a valid defence as the provision is penal and requires strict compliance β€” Notice must be precise regarding the dishonoured cheque amount

2025 INSC 1133 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH KAVERI PLASTICS Vs. MAHDOOM BAWA BAHRUDEEN NOORUL ( Before : B.R. Gavai, CJI. and N.V. Anjaria, J. ) Criminal Appeal Nos….of…

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 β€” Section 138 β€” Dishonour of cheque β€” Territorial jurisdiction β€” Where a payee maintains his bank account in a particular branch and deposits cheques issued by the drawer for collection through that account, the complaint for dishonour of such cheques must be filed in the court having jurisdiction over the location of the payee’s bank branch, even if the cheques were presented at a different branch of the bank for the purpose of crediting the payee’s account.

2025 INSC 897 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PRAKASH CHIMANLAL SHETH Vs. JAGRUTI KEYUR RAJPOPAT ( Before : Sanjay Kumar and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal Nos.…

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 β€” Section 200 β€” Complaint β€” Amendment β€” Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 β€” Section 138 β€” Dishonour of Cheque β€” Power of Criminal Court to amend complaint β€” Amendments not alien to Cr.P.C. even post-cognizance, provided no prejudice to accused β€” Supreme Court in S.R. Sukumar and Modi Distillery cases allowed amendments to correct curable infirmities, even after cognizance.

2025 INSC 899 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BANSAL MILK CHILLING CENTRE Vs. RANA MILK FOOD PRIVATE LTD. AND ANOTHER ( Before : B.V. Nagarathna and K. V. Viswanathan,…

You missed