Sale Deeds Must Be Interpreted Literally When the Language is Clear and Unambiguous: Supreme Court    |     Non-Signatory Can Be Bound by Arbitration Clause Based on Conduct and Involvement: Supreme Court    |     Right to Passport is a Fundamental Right, Denial Without Justification Violates Article 21: Allahabad High Court    |     Insurance Company's Liability Remains Despite Policy Cancellation Due to Dishonored Cheque: Calcutta High Court    |     Deductions Under Sections 36(1)(vii) and 36(1)(viia) of the Income Tax Act Are Independent and Cannot Be Curtailed: Bombay High Court    |     Diary Entries Cannot Alone Implicate the Accused Without Corroborative Evidence: Supreme Court Upholds Discharge of Accused in Corruption Case    |     MACT | Fraud Vitiates All Judicial Acts, Even Without Specific Review Powers: Rajasthan High Court    |     Right of Private Defense Cannot Be Weighed in Golden Scales: Madhya Pradesh High Court Acquits Appellant in Culpable Homicide Case    |     If Two Reasonable Conclusions Are Possible, Acquittal Should Not Be Disturbed: Supreme Court    |     Kalelkar Award Explicitly Provides Holiday Benefits for Temporary Employees, Not Subject to Government Circulars: Supreme Court Upholds Holiday and Overtime Pay    |     NDPS | Homogeneous Mixing of Bulk Drugs Essential for Valid Sampling Under NDPS Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court    |     Pre-Arrest Bail Not a Right but an Exception: Himachal High Court Denied Bail In Dowry Death Case"    |     POCSO | Scholar Register Is Sufficient to Determine Victim’s Age in POCSO Cases: Madhya Pradesh High Court    |     Abuse of Official Position in Appointments: Prima Facie Case for Criminal Misconduct: Delhi High Court Upholds Framing of Charges Against Swati Maliwal in DCW Corruption Case    |     Service Law | Similarly Situated Employees Cannot Be Denied Equal Treatment: PH High Court Orders Regularization    |     Presumption of Innocence Remains Supreme Unless Clearly Overturned: PH High Court Affirming Acquittal    |     Any Physical Liaison with A Girl Of Less Than Eighteen Years Is A Strict Offense.: Patna High Court Reiterates Strict Stance On Sexual Offences Against Minors    |     Orissa High Court Rules Res Judicata Inapplicable When Multiple Appeals Arise from Same Judgment    |     Mandatory Section 80 Notice Cannot Be Bypassed Lightly:  Jammu & Kashmir High Court Returns Plaint for Non-Compliance    |     Bombay High Court Denies Permanent Lecturer Appointment for Failing to Meet UGC Eligibility Criteria at Time of Appointment    |     Deferred Cross-Examination Gave Time for Witness Tampering, Undermining Fair Trial: Allahabad 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

 

Similar News