Recovery Of Excess Payment Made By Mistake Is Permissible When Employee Furnished An Undertaking To Refund: Supreme Court Anticipatory Bail Application Under Sec 482 BNSS Is Maintainable Even If No Formal Order Of Arrest Is Passed By CGST Authorities: Allahabad High Court Consensual Physical Relationship Following Three-Year Courtship Does Not Amount To Rape If Marriage Promise Fails: Supreme Court Criminalization Of Civil Disputes | Courts Must Not Engage In Speculative Reasoning While Dealing With Quashing Petitions Under Section 482 CrPC: Supreme Court Mere Recovery Of Tainted Money In The Absence Of Proof Of Demand Is Insufficient To Sustain Conviction Under Section 7 And 13 PC Act: Supreme Court High Court Cannot Quash NDPS Proceedings Merely Relying On Jurisprudence Regarding Evidentiary Value Of Confessional Statements: Supreme Court Extra-Judicial Confession Made While In Police Custody Is Inadmissible In Evidence: Supreme Court Taxing Authorities Must Levy Tax Based On The Form Of Goods At The Time Of Sale, Not On Potential End Use: Supreme Court Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders CBI Probe Into State Corruption Scams After Punjab Police Fails To Act On ED’s Section 66(2) PMLA Referral Section 482 CrPC | FIR Based On Consensual Relationship Gone Sour Cannot Be Sustained To Coerce Marriage: Supreme Court CISF Personnel Soliciting Bribes For Employment Is Guilty Of 'Gross Misconduct' Under Section 18 CISF Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court PIL | State Cannot Use Demolition Powers To Silence Whistleblowers Or Deflect Accountability: Punjab & Haryana High Court Criminal Proceedings Against In-Laws Without Specific Allegations Of Overt Acts Constitute Abuse Of Process: Supreme Court Order 22 Rule 9 CPC | Admission In An Abated Suit Does Not Constitute Estoppel Against Landlord In A Fresh Eviction Proceeding: Calcutta High Court Arbitral Award Cannot Be Set Aside For Non-Adjudication Of Claims Specifically Abandoned By Parties: Delhi High Court Mere Long Possession Is Not Adverse Possession; Defendant Must Prove Hostile Animus To Deny Title Of True Owner: Himachal Pradesh High Court Reopening Of Assessment Under Sec 148A(d) Income Tax Act Cannot Be Based On 'Change Of Opinion' Without Fresh Tangible Material: Gujarat High Court Municipal Authorities Must Initiate Formal Proceedings And Grant Opportunity Of Hearing Before Sealing Premises:  Jharkhand High Court Court Cannot Compel Third-Party To Undergo DNA Test Unless Necessary For Just Adjudication: Madhya Pradesh High Court Trial Court Cannot Defer Bail Application Merely Because A Transfer Petition Is Pending In High Court: Punjab & Haryana High Court Section 108 BNS | Mere Taunts Or Harassment Regarding Not Bearing A Male Child Do Not Constitute Abetment To Suicide: Rajasthan High Court

"Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds Conviction in Cheque Bounce Case: 'No Grounds to Interfere with the Judgment'"

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Andhra Pradesh High Court, presided over by Justice A.V. Ravindra Babu, dismissed a Criminal Revision Case challenging a previous conviction in a cheque bounce matter under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The case, filed against Puvvada Venkata Krishna Murthy, saw the High Court confirm the judgment passed by the I Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam.

The case (Criminal Revision Case No: 657 of 2010) was decided on 22nd February 2024, where the court stated, "Having regard to the overall facts and circumstances and considering the material on record, absolutely, the judgment...cannot be said to be illegal and irregular."

The dispute centered around a cheque of Rs. 66,000, which was issued by the accused, Puvvada Venkata Krishna Murthy, and subsequently dishonored due to insufficient funds. The cheque was initially given in repayment of a loan of Rs. 50,000 with interest. Upon dishonor, the complainant pursued legal action, leading to Murthy's conviction in the lower courts.

Justice Babu, in his ruling, noted, "The evidence on record proves the factum of existence of a legally enforceable debt against the accused." This statement came after a detailed examination of the evidence presented, including the cheque, bank memos, and testimonies.

One of the critical arguments made by the defense was the issuance of a cheque return memo on a non-banking day (Sunday). The court addressed this by stating, "The complainant has no necessity to fabricate Ex.P.7...There was also a possibility for making the date as 26.10.2003 by the bank authorities mistakenly."

The High Court's decision reinforces the legal responsibilities inherent in issuing cheques and the serious consequences of their dishonor. This ruling serves as a reminder of the judiciary's role in upholding the sanctity of financial transactions and the implications of the Negotiable Instruments Act in financial disputes. The court's directive to the lower court to carry out the sentence against Murthy further cements the gravity of the offense.

Date of Decision : 22-02-2024

PUVVADA VENKATA KRISHNA MURTHY Vs. THE STATE OF A.P

 

Latest Legal News