Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1992 (3) TMI 365

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... -dated cheques in terms of compromise arrived at between the parties towards recovery of rents due from the petitioner. In No. 95/91 the complainant presented the cheque dated 20-4-91 for encashment and it was returned twice by the bank on 23-4-91 and 3-6-91 with the endorsement 'refer to drawer'. The second cheque dated 25-4-91 was also returned once and was presented on 3-6-91 again, which was also returned with the endorsement 'insufficient funds'. The third cheque dated 4-5-91 was also dishonored twice on 7-5-91 and 3-6-91 with the same endorsement. The complainant alleges that the cheques were presented after giving due prior notice by the letter dated 28-5-91 to the petitioner, who paid a sum of ₹ 4,000/- and was .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ccasions and the payee or holder in due course in entitled to present the cheque at any time within a period of six months from the date on which it was drawn and for filing the complaint he should have served notice of such dishonour to the drawer; the payee or holder in due course can make a second representation of the cheque and if other conditions are fulfilled, he can launch a complaint on the basis of the second dishonour of the cheque as the cheque would remain valid for a period of six months. 4. Section 138 of the Act lays down that if a cheque issued pursuant to a debt or other liability is returned to the bank unpaid, either because of the amount of money standing to the credit of the account is insufficient to honour the ch .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ered with the judgment in Mahadevan's case rendered by another Division Bench - observing as under : From the scheme of the provisions in Chapter XVII of the Act two features loom large. First is that more than one cause of action on the same cheque is not contemplated or envisaged. Second is, institution of prosecution cannot be made after one month of the cause of action. If more than one cause of action on the same cheque can be created, its consequence would be that the same drawer of the cheque can be prosecuted and even convicted again and again on the strength of the same cheque. Legislature cannot be imputed with the intention to subject a drawer of cheque to repeated prosecutions and convictions on the strength of one chequ .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Sales Tax, U.P. v. Parson Tools and Plants, Kanpur, [1975] 3 SCR 743 and contended that S. 138 of the Act should be interpreted liberally in favour of the accused, as it is a penal provision. The Supreme Court in that decision held that where the legislature clearly declares its intent in the scheme and language of the statute, it is the duty of the Court to give effect to the same without scanning its wisdom or policy, and without engrafting, adding or implying anything which is not congenial to or consistent with such expressed intent of the law given, more so if the statute is a taxing statute. The legislature thought fit to prescribe a period of six months or the period of validity of the cheque, whichever is earlier, for presentation t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... riod, it is not open to this Court to read into the Section, by adding anything to it. 9. The rest of the contentions of the petitioner involve questions of fact relating to the alleged offence. The question whether the accused had to pay money to the complainant and whether he had issued the cheque, as well as other questions of fact have to be established on evidence. It is a matter of evidence whether the complainant is able to establish the various allegations, as held in P.T.V. Ramanuj Achari v. Giridharlal Agrawal 1991 (II) ALT 10. There are no grounds to quash the proceedings under S. 482, Cr.P.C. The Crl. Petition No. 1687/91 is dismissed. 10. Though the dates of cheques, dates of return by the bank and the dates of notices ar .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates