Bail Applicant Under Mandatory Obligation To Disclose Criminal Antecedents, Non-Disclosure Results In Erroneous Decisions: Andhra Pradesh High Court Judicial Decrees Cannot Be Set Aside By Administrative Orders After Decades; Long-Standing Revenue Entries Must Be Protected: Allahabad High Court 'Any Use Whatsoever' Includes Promotion & Events: Bombay High Court Restrains New Indian Express Group From Hosting Commercial Events Outside Southern States Reserved Category Candidates Who Qualify On Their Own Seniority Must Be Adjusted Against Unreserved Vacancies: Calcutta High Court Decree For Possession Can Be Passed If Landlord-Tenant Relationship & Termination Are Admitted; Unregistered Lease Is Month-To-Month: Delhi High Court Prosecution Against Co-Accused Not Sustainable When Main Accused Is Discharged On Same Facts: Jharkhand High Court Admission Of Handwriting On Account Statement Is Not Admission Of Its Contents; Corroborative Evidence Necessary To Prove Claim: Gujarat High Court Omission Of Label Defects In Food Inspector's Spot Memo Fatal To Prosecution For Misbranding: Himachal Pradesh High Court RBI Must Consult State Government, Not Just Registrar, To Supersede Co-operative Bank Board; Principles Of Natural Justice Excluded Under Section 36AAA: Kerala High Court Suit Filed Before IBC Proceedings Cannot Be Dismissed Under Order VII Rule 11 CPC; Section 96 Moratorium Only Stays Pending Actions: Calcutta High Court Senior Citizens Not Technologically Savvy Cannot Be Penalized For Not Checking Case Status On Court Website: Tripura High Court Telangana High Court Quashes Case Against CM Revanth Reddy Over 2019 Election Roadshow, Cites Bar Under Section 195 CrPC Maintenance Tribunal Orders Passed Without Mandated Three-Member Coram Are A Nullity: Punjab & Haryana High Court School Register Entry Regarding Date Of Birth Lacks Probative Value Unless Source Of Information Is Proved: Madhya Pradesh High Court Sets Aside POCSO Conviction Limitation Period For Specific Performance Starts From Date Of Refusal If No Fixed Date Stipulated In Agreement: Karnataka High Court Pensionary Benefits Not ‘Pecuniary Advantage’, Cannot Be Deducted From Income For Motor Accident Compensation: Punjab & Haryana High Court Will | Disinheriting Caring Spouse In Favour Of Non-Relatives Is An ‘Unnatural Disposition’ Raising Grave Suspicion: Supreme Court Registration Does Not Automatically Validate Will If Process Is Shrouded In Suspicion; Testator's Illiteracy Increases Burden On Propounder: Supreme Court Propounder Faces Heavy Burden Of Proof When Testator Is Illiterate; Registration Does Not Cure Unexplained Suspicious Circumstances: Supreme Court

"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