UDCPR | Municipal Authorities Empowered To Grant Relaxation For Recreational Open Spaces In Redevelopment Projects: Bombay High Court Appellate Court Can Enhance Compensation Under Motor Vehicles Act Even Without Cross-Appeal By Claimants: Allahabad High Court State Instrumentalities Cannot Supplement Reasons For Withholding Public Money Via Affidavits Years Later: Calcutta High Court Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act | Victim's Status As 'Illegal Immigrant' Does Not Dilute Offence Or Shield Perpetrator: Bombay High Court Clubbing Of Criminal Trials | No Basis To Direct Consolidation If Connected Proceedings Have Already Concluded: Delhi High Court IBC ‘Clean Slate’ Principle Cannot Extinguish Pre-existing Crystallized Liability Under Labour Awards: Bombay High Court Section 406 IPC | 'Donation' Does Not Constitute 'Entrustment'; Criminal Prosecution Quashed In Absence Of Aggrieved Victim: Delhi High Court Failure To Deliver Possession Of Plot Constitutes "Continuous Wrong" Giving Rise To Recurrent Cause Of Action Under Consumer Protection Act: Delhi State Commission High Court Cannot Entertain Writ Petition Under Article 226 When Statutory Appellate Remedy Under Section 107 CGST Act Is Available: Gujarat High Court Appointment Of Temple Servants Is The Exclusive Prerogative Of The Hereditary Trustee: Kerala High Court Stay Of Suit Proceedings Under CPC Does Not Automatically Bar Adjudication Of Pending Temporary Injunction Application: Rajasthan High Court Section 136A MV Act | Supreme Court Directs States To Impound Vehicles With Unpaid E-Challans And Mandates Electronic Enforcement Compliance Section 115 CPC | Executing Court Cannot Dismiss Execution Petition On Hyper-Technical Grounds Regarding LRs Of Judgment Debtor: Himachal Pradesh High Court Succession Act | Will Not Validly Executed If Attesting Witness Admits Signing Without Witnessing Testator’s Signature: Madras High Court High Court Cannot Interfere Under Article 227 To Correct Errors Of Fact Or Act As An Appellate Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court Advocates Act 1961 | Bar Council Has No Power To Suspend Advocate Pending Disciplinary Enquiry: Allahabad High Court Identification Of Accused By Police Personnel In Pitch Darkness Without Prior Acquaintance Is Unreliable: Himachal Pradesh High Court Body Shaming Or Insulting Physical Appearance Does Not Per Se Constitute Offence Under Section 509 IPC: Karnataka High Court Drishyam 3 | Interim Injunction To Restrain Film Release Cannot Be Granted Without Establishing Clear Subsisting Legal Right: Madras High Court Town Planning Scheme | Statutory Notice To Occupiers Under Rule 12(2)(a) Punjab Municipal Rules Is Mandatory And Independent Of Notice To Owner: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Absence of certificate under Section 65B of the Evidence Act – A curable defect - Overturns Acquittal in Cheque Dishonour Case: Delhi High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


High Court of Delhi set aside a lower court’s decision, restoring a complaint in a notable cheque dishonour case. The judgment, delivered by Hon’ble Justice Saurabh Banerjee, highlighted the significance of proper legal procedures and the court’s approach towards procedural lapses.

In the case of Adarsh Gaur versus State of NCT of Delhi & Anr., the High Court criticized the trial court’s decision to acquit the respondent based on procedural irregularities. Justice Banerjee asserted, “Procedural defects concerning tracking reports were curable and should not have led to dismissal of the complaint,” emphasizing that such lapses are not grounds for acquittal when substantive justice is at stake.

The case revolved around the respondent’s failure to honor a cheque amounting to Rs. 80,500, which was meant for covering unpaid rent and additional charges. The trial court had previously acquitted the respondent, citing inadequacies in the legal notice and discrepancies in the postal receipts.

The High Court, however, found that the trial court overlooked crucial admissions made by the respondent about their liability. The judgment further stated, “The absence of a certificate under Section 65B cannot render the evidence inadmissible,” referring to the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, which deals with electronic records.

This landmark decision is significant in the realm of cheque dishonour cases under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, as it clarifies the importance of procedural aspects while ensuring that they do not overshadow the pursuit of justice.

The High Court has directed the trial court to proceed with the case in accordance with the law, providing the appellant with an opportunity to address the procedural shortcomings.

Date - December 18, 2023

ADARSH GAUR  VS STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.  

 

Latest Legal News