Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

"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