Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2022 (4) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (4) TMI 1146 - HC - Indian LawsDishonor of Cheque - appreciation of evidence is based on sound principles regarding appreciation of evidence in the offence under the provisions of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - cheque bounce case or not - HELD THAT:- It is evident that it is the defence of the accused that he was going along with one Narayansa Raibagi to some village in the year 2006 and he kept signed cheque in his bag. When they were taking tea in a hotel, there was theft of his bag. According to accused, the said Narayansa has filed a civil suit against him and he has given one of the cheque to this complainant and got filed the case - There is no iota of evidence placed before the Court to show that Narayansa accompanying him in the year 2006 and he lost the cheque and the said Narayansa has misused the cheque after nearly four years of theft of cheque and got lodged the complaint. If the defence of the accused is considered, then this defence rests with his reply notice only. If at all he has lost the cheque, as stated in his explanation in the statement recorded under section 313 of Cr.P.C., he could have lodged the complaint with the police. One carbon copy of the letter stated to be addressed to the SSK bank dated 5.6.2006 is produced along with written statement. But no evidence is adduced calling upon any officials of the bank to prove his contention and to show that he has intimated the bank about theft of cheques. To whom he was giving signed blank cheques at Bhagyanagar, why they asked him blank cheques, what happened to his other cheques, mentioned in reply? No explanation is forthcoming. No bank statement is produced to show that he had any move in his bank on the date he lost the cheque, no persons were examined to prove it. If at all he has lost the cheque in the year 2006 itself, then how one cheque came in possession of this said Narayansa is also not forthcoming; why he has misused only one cheque if there are six cheques is also not forthcoming. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in a decision in TRIYAMBAK S. HEGDE VERSUS SRIPAD [2021 (9) TMI 1159 - SUPREME COURT] has referred the decision of KAUSHALYA DEVI MASSAND VERSUS ROOPKISHORE KHORE [2011 (3) TMI 1491 - SUPREME COURT] and has held that it is not like IPC cases wherein the sentence of imprisonment is called. On the other hand they are like a regulatory offences for recovery of the amount paid. The order of sentence of imprisonment for six months needs to be set aside by modifying it to fine of ₹ 5,000/- only and the order of payment of ₹ 5,00,000/- as compensation is to be upheld - The revision petition is allowed in part.
|