Conviction Under Section 409 IPC Postulates Strict Proof Of Entrustment; Suspicion However Grave Cannot Substitute Proof: Supreme Court Criminal Prosecution Emanating From Past Matrimonial Relationship Ought Not To Linger After Divorce: Supreme Court Negligence Of Previous Counsel Not A Ground To Reopen Concluded Pre-Charge Evidence Under Section 311 CrPC: Allahabad High Court Unregistered Agreement To Sell Cannot Protect Tenant's Possession Under Section 53A Transfer Of Property Act: Delhi High Court Certified Copies Of Registered Sale Deeds Admissible As Secondary Evidence Without Proving Loss Of Original: Gauhati High Court Counsel Representing Deceased Party Must Inform Court Of Death Under Order XXII Rule 10-A CPC: J&K High Court Son Staying In Father's House Out Of Love And Affection Is A Mere Licensee, Cannot Challenge Father's Title: Delhi High Court Conviction For Murder Cannot Stand Where Single Blow Inflicted In Sudden Fight Without Premeditation: Uttarakhand High Court Inability To Trace Suppliers Or Buyers No Ground For Custodial Interrogation Once Recovery Is Effected: Punjab & Haryana High Court Right To Assemble Peacefully To Celebrate Association Anniversary Is A Fundamental Right; Unlawful Assembly Per Se Not An Offence: Madras High Court Marriage Photographs Can Be Relied Upon To Estimate Quantity Of Gold Ornaments In Matrimonial Disputes: Kerala High Court POCSO Act Not Confined To Securing Convictions, Soul Of Law Lies In Preserving Childhood Dignity & Healing: Madras High Court Special Appeal Maintainable If Single Judge's Order Relates To Authority Acting Without Statutory Appellate Jurisdiction: Allahabad High Court Recall Of Witness For Cross-Examination Permissible On Newly Framed Issue Post-Remand Even If Disposal Timeline Is Fixed: Karnataka High Court Litigant Cannot Overcome Law Of Limitation By Shifting Blame On Counsel Through Inconsistent Stands: Madras High Court Cross-Cases Cannot Be Clubbed If Co-Accused In Complaint Case Is Absconding & Complainant Delayed Process: Allahabad High Court Cross-Cases Cannot Be Clubbed If Co-Accused In Complaint Case Is Absconding & Complainant Delayed Process: Allahabad High Court Preventive Detention Not Warranted If Person Can Be Dealt With Under Ordinary Laws; No Effort To Arrest In Pending Cases: Supreme Court Accused Languishing In Jail For 9 Years Deserves Bail; Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 Violated: Supreme Court Custodial Death | Pendency Of Criminal Trial No Bar For Awarding Compensation Under Public Law Remedy: Gauhati High Court Suit For Possession Under Section 6 Specific Relief Act Barred If Filed Beyond Six Months Of Dispossession: Madras High Court Subsequent Purchaser Is Representative Of Judgment Debtor, Separate Suit Challenging Execution Sale Barred Under Section 47 CPC: Kerala High Court Statutory Bail Restrictions Melt Down When Pre-Trial Detention Is Prolonged & Trial Is Unlikely To Conclude Soon: Delhi High Court Failure To Apprise Accused Of Right Under Section 50 NDPS Act Vitiates Search & Recovery: J&K & Ladakh High Court Section 12(5) Arbitration Act Inapplicable To Proceedings Commenced Before 2015 Amendment; Executing Court Can't Apply Neutrality Norms Retrospectively: Punjab & Haryana High Court Banks Can Share Sale Proceeds Of Secured Assets Outside Liquidation Estate With Homebuyers Under Compromise Agreement: Kerala High Court Election Disputes Must Be Resolved Expeditiously; Long Stays Render Adjudication A Mockery Of Justice: Madras High Court Delhi High Court Suspends LOC, Permits Businessman To Travel Abroad For Healthcare Conferences; Cites Roots In Society & Past Compliance Section 138 NI Act Complaint Not Maintainable By Third Party Who Is Neither Payee Nor Holder In Due Course: Allahabad High Court

"No Ground to Quash FIR in Cheque Dishonour Case, Observes Himachal Pradesh High Court"

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Himachal Pradesh High Court, led by Justice Virender Singh, upheld the legal process in a cheque dishonour case, dismissing a petition seeking to quash a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (NI Act). The decision, delivered on December 27, 2023, emphasized the importance of evidence in matters of financial transactions and allegations of theft.

The petitioner, identified as Abhishek Rao, had approached the court with a plea to quash a complaint and subsequent proceedings concerning a cheque, which was dishonoured due to insufficient funds. The case revolved around a non-CTS (Cheque Truncation System) cheque, which the petitioner alleged was stolen and presented for encashment.

In a detailed judgment, Justice Virender Singh observed, "When nothing is there on the file, in this regard, then, the said ground cannot be considered to quash the FIR, that too, while exercising the powers, under Section 482 CrPC." This remark highlights the court's stance on the insufficiency of evidence regarding the petitioner's claim of cheque theft.

The court meticulously examined the Reserve Bank of India's guidelines and circulars related to CTS cheques. It was noted that the non-CTS cheques were not entirely invalidated at the time of the cheque's issuance. Justice Singh's decision underlined, "The learned counsel appearing for the accused could not point out any circular, which prohibits the acceptance of non-CTS cheques on 31st August, 2011."

The ruling is significant as it sheds light on the legal intricacies of cheque dishonour cases and the necessity of substantial evidence in allegations of theft. The court's decision to dismiss the petition reinforces the judiciary's commitment to uphold the sanctity of legal procedures in financial disputes.

The accused, through his counsel, has been directed to appear before the trial court on January 11, 2024, to proceed with the case as per the law. This case serves as a precedent for similar cases involving financial instruments and the importance of adhering to RBI guidelines.

Decided on : 27-12-2023

ABHISHEK RAO VS STATE OF H.P. AND ANOTHER

 

Latest Legal News