Even 1.5 Years in Jail Doesn’t Dilute Section 37 NDPS Rigour: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Bail in 710 Kg Poppy Husk Case Stay of Conviction Nullifies Disqualification Under Section 8(3) RP Act: Allahabad High Court Dismisses Quo Warranto Against Rahul Gandhi Custodial Interrogation Necessary to Uncover ₹2 Crore MGNREGA Scam: Kerala High Court Rejects Anticipatory Bail for Vendors in Corruption Case Order 41 Rule 23 CPC | Trial Court Cannot Decide Title Solely on a Vacated Judgment: Himachal Pradesh High Court Strikes By Bar Associations Cannot Stall Justice: Allahabad High Court Holds Office Bearers Liable for Contempt if Revenue Suits Are Delayed Due to Boycotts To Constitute a Service PE, Services Must Be Furnished Within India Through Employees Present in India: Delhi High Court Medical Negligence | State Liable for Loss of Vision in Botched Cataract Surgeries: Gauhati High Court Awards Compensation Waiver of Right Under Section 50 NDPS is Valid Even Without Panch Signatures: Bombay High Court Agricultural Land Is 'Property' Under Hindu Women’s Right to Property Act, 1937: A.P. High Court Tenant Who Pays Rent After Verifying Landlord’s Will Cannot Dispute His Title Under Section 116 Evidence Act: Himachal Pradesh High Court Dismisses Eviction Challenge by HP State Cooperative Bank Clever Drafting Cannot Override Limitation Bar: Gujarat High Court Rejects Suit for Specific Performance Once Divorce by Mutual Consent Is Final, Wife Cannot Pursue Criminal Case for Stridhan Without Reserving Right to Do So: Himachal Pradesh High Court Caste-Based Insults Must Show Intent – Mere Abuse Not Enough for Atrocities Act: Gujarat High Court Upholds Acquittal Failure to Inform Detenu of Right to Represent to Detaining Authority Vitiates NSA Detention: Gauhati High Court Awarding Further Interest On Penal Charges Is Contrary To Fundamental Policy Of Indian Arbitration Law: Bombay 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