MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

"Gujarat High Court Upholds Acquittal in Cheque Dishonour Case, Emphasizes 'Probable Defence' and 'Presumption of Innocence'"

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Gujarat High Court, presided over by Justice M.K. Thakker, reaffirmed the acquittal of Ilaben Jitendrabhai Tilawat in a cheque dishonour case, originally acquitted by the 7th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Negotiable Instruments Court), Rajkot. The case, bearing R/Criminal Appeal (Against Acquittal) No. 2348 of 2022, was decided on 27th February 2024.

This appeal was filed under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, against the judgment dated 17th September 2022, in the context of a disputed cheque of Rs.7,70,000, which was returned with the endorsement 'account closed'. The complainant, Narendrabhai Kantilal Joshi, alleged that the cheque was issued by the respondent, Ilaben Jitendrabhai Tilawat, following a failed property transaction.

In delivering the judgment, Justice Thakker highlighted, "It would be sufficient to rebut the presumption raise under Section 139 of the N.I. Act if the accused raise probable defence, the standard of proof of accused to rebut the presumption under Section 139 of the N.I. Act is preponderance of the probability."

The Court meticulously reviewed the evidence and testimonies presented, including the discrepancies in the signatures on the cheque and the specimen signature card. The Court observed, "The signature on the cheque and on the specimen on the card is different signature and as the account was closed therefore, it was returned with an endorsement of 'closed account'."

Emphasizing the principle of 'presumption of innocence', the Court stated, "From the material which is brought on record was consistent with the innocence of the accused, which may reasonably be true, even though it is not positively prove to be proved then also accused would be entitled for acquittal."

In conclusion, the Court found no substantial reason to interfere with the trial court's decision and dismissed the appeal. The judgment and order of acquittal dated 17.09.2022 in Criminal Case No. 2729 of 2016 were thus confirmed.

The case was argued by Ms. Falguni D. Trivedi for the appellant and Ms. Monali Bhatt, Additional Public Prosecutor, for the respondent. This ruling is a pivotal affirmation of the legal principles governing cheque dishonour and the standards of proof required in criminal proceedings.

Date of Decision: 27-02-2024

Narendrabhai Kantilal Joshi vs. Ilaben Jitendrabhai Tilavat and Another 

 

Latest Legal News