Appellate Court Can Allow Additional Evidence To Ensure Fair Adjudication Even If Not Produced In Trial: Madhya Pradesh High Court Police Can Freeze Bank Accounts Under Section 106 BNSS Upon Suspicion Of 'Proceeds Of Crime': Punjab & Haryana High Court 'No Penalty For Monthly MGQ Shortfall If Annual Target Met': Supreme Court Upholds Quashing Of Excise Department Demands For Liquor Licensees 'Murder Went Unavenged, But Courts Cannot Convict On Mere Assumptions': Supreme Court Acquits Accused In 1988 Murder Case, Quashes High Court's Remit Order 'NCSC Cannot Pass Mandatory Adjudicatory Orders Directing Payment Of Arrears': Supreme Court Clarifies Commission's Powers Under Article 338 "'Cannot Present Fait Accompli': Supreme Court Upholds Denial Of NOC To Airman For Skipping Prior Permission To Apply For Civil Post" Supreme Court Upholds 2017 Notification For Ex Post Facto Environmental Clearances, Quashes 2021 Office Memorandum As Impermissible Executive Overreach Workman Fails To Prove 240 Days Continuous Work; Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Denial Of Reinstatement For "Abandonment Of Service" Party Cannot Take Contradictory Stands In Same Case, Admissions In Pleadings Bind Them Under Order XII Rule 6 CPC: Telangana High Court Delayed Recovery Of Weapon From Open Space Casts Serious Doubt On Prosecution Story: Madhya Pradesh High Court Acquits Murder Convicts Procedural Irregularities By Public Servants Serve As Circumstantial Evidence Of Conspiracy In Corruption Cases: Kerala High Court Blaming Previous Counsel For Omission Does Not Satisfy 'Due Diligence' Test To Amend Plaint After Trial Commences: Punjab & Haryana High Court Muslim Man's Second Marriage Under Special Marriage Act Void Despite Personal Law Permitting Bigamy: Karnataka High Court Suppression Of Material Facts Regarding Criminal Antecedents Disentitles Accused To Discretionary Relief Of Bail: Orissa High Court Section 311 CrPC | Delay Or Absence Of Examination-In-Chief No Bar To Summon Material Witnesses: Allahabad High Court Revenue Authorities Lack Jurisdiction To Declare Genuineness Of Wills Or Validity Of Settlement Deeds; Parties Must Approach Civil Court: Andhra Pradesh High Court Demand Of Bribe Is Sine Qua Non For Conviction Under PC Act, Mere Recovery Of Tainted Money Not Enough: Bombay High Court Title And Ownership Irrelevant In Suit Under Section 6 Specific Relief Act; Plaint Liable To Be Rejected If Filed Beyond Six Months: Delhi High Court Receipt Of Pension By Widow Can Be Considered To Determine 'Just Compensation' But Not To Deprive Claimants Of Award: Calcutta High Court FSL Report Lacking Scientific Criteria And Data Is Inadmissible In Evidence: Allahabad High Court Issues Directives For Testing Viscera Standard Of Proof In Railway Accident Claims Is Preponderance Of Probabilities, Not Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Gujarat High Court No Second Statutory Appeal Lies Against Conviction By Appellate Court Reversing Acquittal; Revision Is Sole Remedy: Supreme Court Wives' Property Is Their Own, Not Husband's: Supreme Court REJECTS High Court's Succession Formula; Restores Clarity For Christian Inheritance

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