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

High Court Reinstates Conviction in Cheque Dishonour Case: “Existence of Legal Liability Not in Dispute” Asserts Justice Gupta

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, led by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, has overturned an appellate court’s judgment, reinstating the conviction of an individual involved in a cheque dishonour case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

The case, which has seen various twists and turns, culminated in a decisive judgment pronounced on November 2, 2023. The petitioner, Girraj Sharma, had initially secured a conviction against the respondent, Devender, in the trial court. However, this conviction was later reversed by the appellate court, leading to the current appeal in the High Court.

Justice Gupta, in his ruling, emphasized the undeniable presence of a legal liability, stating, “Once the signature on the cheque was admitted by the accused in so many words... the existence of legal liability remained not in dispute at all, in view of presumption under Section 139 of the NI Act.” This observation was pivotal in the court’s decision to set aside the appellate court’s judgment and restore the trial court’s conviction and sentence.

The case revolved around a cheque of ₹1,75,000, which was returned due to an incomplete signature. The High Court scrutinized the evidence and found that the appellate court’s judgment was based on conjectures and had misappreciated the facts.

Furthermore, the High Court delved into the delay in the filing of the appeal by the accused, noting that the plea taken by the accused was “absolutely not sustainable.” This formed another crucial part of the judgment as the High Court reversed the appellate court’s decision regarding the condonation of delay.

 

 Date of Decision: 02.11.2023

 GIRRAJ SHARMA VS DEVENDER             

 

Latest Legal News