4-month jail term upheld in cheque bounce case

All the cheques were dishonoured on presentation to the bank: complaint

July 20, 2018 01:35 am | Updated 01:35 am IST - New Delhi

A court here has dismissed an appeal by a man against award of four months imprisonment to him in a cheque bounce case.

A Magistrate court had convicted and awarded the sentence to him on a complaint.

Dismissing the appeal by the accused, Additional Sessions Judge Suresh Kumar Gupta said, “Appellant has not made the payment of the cheques in question to the respondent [complainant]. He has not even shown his inclination to make the payment of the cheques in question to the respondent.”

“There is nothing on record to take a lenient view in favour of the appellant. To my mind, nothing is brought on record by the appellant to take a different view with respect to the sentence awarded by the trial court. There is nothing on record to interfere with the order on sentence passed by the trial court. Hence, order on sentence is also upheld,’’ the Judge further said.

‘Orally agreed’

The complaint stated that the appellant had orally agreed to supply a four-wheeler to the complainant and received ₹6.42 lakh for it from him.

However, the appellant purchased the vehicle in his own name for ₹5.63 lakh.

Thereafter, he promised to refund the amount to him and issued five cheques, including one cheque for ₹1.5 lakh, as a part payment.

But all the cheques were dishonoured on presentation to the bank, the complaint said.

Thereupon, the complainant lodged an first information report against the appellant.

When he was arrested, he gave an assurance that cheques would be honoured and issued two cheques of ₹1.5 lakh each which were also dishonoured on presentation to the bank with the remarks “payment stopped by the drawer”.

Thereafter, the complainant filed a complaint under the Negotiable Instruments Act.

Upholding the Magistrate court order, the Judge said, “The entire evidence on the file shows that respondent has proved all the ingredients incorporated under Section 138 of the Act. The appellant has been rightly held guilty and convicted under Section 138 of the Act.”

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.