Government Can Resume Leased Land For Public Purpose; 'Substantial Compliance' Of 60-Day Notice Sufficient: Kerala High Court Revenue Can't Cite Pending Litigation to Justify One Year of Adjudication Inaction: Karnataka High Court Limitation | 1,142 Days of Silence: Orissa High Court Rejects Litigant's Claim That His Lawyer Never Called SC/ST Act's Bar on Anticipatory Bail Does Not Apply When Complaint Fails to Make Out Prima Facie Case: Karnataka High Court Oral Agreement for Sale Cannot Be Dismissed for Want of Stamp or Registration: Calcutta High Court Upholds Injunction Finance Company's Own Legal Manager Cannot Appoint Arbitrator — Award Passed by Such Arbitrator Is Non-Est and Inexecutable: Andhra Pradesh High Court District Court Cannot Remand Charity Commissioner's Order: Bombay High Court Division Bench Settles Conflicting Views Framing "Points For Determination" Not Always Mandatory For First Appellate Courts: Allahabad High Court Delhi HC Finds Rape Conviction Cannot Stand On Testimony Where Victim Showed 'Unnatural Concern' For Her Alleged Attacker Limitation in Partition Suit Cannot Be Decided Without Evidence: Karnataka High Court Cheque Dishonour Accused Can Probabilise Defence Without Entering Witness Box — Through Cross-Examination And Marked Documents Alone: Madras High Court Contributory Negligence | No Driving Licence and Three on a Motorcycle Cannot Mean the Victim Caused the Accident: Rajasthan High Court LL.B Degree Cannot Be Ground to Deny Maintenance to Divorced Wife: Gujarat High Court Dried Leaves and Branches Are Not 'Ganja': Delhi High Court Grants Bail Under NDPS Act Family Court Judge Secretly Compared Handwriting Without Telling Wife, Then Punished Her Hesitation: Delhi High Court Quashes Divorce Decree Co-Owner Can Sell Undivided Share in Joint Property Without Consent of Other Co-owners — Sale Deed Valid to Extent of Transferor's Share: Orissa High Court Mandatory Safeguards of Section 42 NDPS Cannot Be Bypassed — Even When 1329 Kg of Hashish Is Seized: Gujarat High Court Affirms Acquittal

Absence of Proven Notice Renders Cheque Bounce Case Non-maintainable: Calcutta High Court Acquits Accused in Section 138 N.I. Act Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Calcutta High Court has acquitted an individual in a cheque bounce case, underscoring the indispensable requirement of proving notice under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The judgment, delivered by The Hon’ble Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul), emphasizes the procedural necessity of establishing the service of notice to the drawer of the bounced cheque.

The case, titled Sri Sarit Kumar Bose @ Sarit Kumar Basu Vs Smt. Rita Mallick & Anr. (CRR 1403 of 2019 with CRAN 1 of 2019), revolved around the conviction of the petitioner for a cheque dishonor under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. The original and appellate courts had convicted the petitioner without proper evidence of the mandatory notice being served, a key procedural element in such cases.

Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul) observed, "The notice under Section 138 is foundational for a dishonor of cheque case," indicating that without proven notice, the case is deemed non-maintainable. This statement forms the crux of the judgment delivered on January 17, 2024.

Highlighting the inadequacy of the lower courts' reliance on the accused's admission under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C., the High Court noted that such an admission alone is insufficient for conviction, especially when there is no corroborative evidence of notice service as per Section 138 N.I. Act.

The High Court's decision to set aside the judgments of the Additional District & Sessions Judge and the Trial Court for not being in accordance with the law and acquitting the petitioner, has been received as a significant precedent in the realm of negotiable instruments law. The judgment is expected to influence future cases involving cheque dishonor, highlighting the importance of procedural correctness and the rights of the accused.

Calcutta High Court's ruling brings to the forefront the essential legal tenets that govern cases under the Negotiable Instruments Act, particularly the non-negotiable requirement of proving notice in cheque bounce cases.

Date of Decision: 17.01.2024

Sri Sarit Kumar Bose @ Sarit Kumar Basu Vs Smt. Rita Mallick & Anr.

Latest Legal News