"Party Autonomy is the Backbone of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Upholds Sole Arbitrator Appointment Despite Party’s Attempts to Frustrate Arbitration Proceedings    |     Reasonable Doubt Arising from Sole Testimony in Absence of Corroboration, Power Cut Compounded Identification Difficulties: Supreme Court Acquits Appellants in Murder Case    |     ED Can Investigate Without FIRs: PH High Court Affirms PMLA’s Broad Powers    |     Accident Claim | Contributory Negligence Cannot Be Vicariously Attributed to Passengers: Supreme Court    |     Default Bail | Indefeasible Right to Bail Prevails: Allahabad High Court Faults Special Judge for Delayed Extension of Investigation    |     “Habitual Offenders Cannot Satisfy Bail Conditions Under NDPS Act”: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Bail to Accused with Extensive Criminal Record    |     Delhi High Court Denies Substitution for Son Due to 'Gross Unexplained Delay' of Over Six Years in Trademark Suit    |     Section 4B of the Tenancy Act Cannot Override Land Exemptions for Public Development: Bombay High Court    |     Suspicion, However High, Is Not a Substitute for Proof: Calcutta High Court Orders Reinstatement of Coast Guard Officer Dismissed on Suspicion of Forgery    |     Age Not Conclusively Proven, Prosecutrix Found to be a Consenting Party: Chhattisgarh High Court Acquits Accused in POCSO Case    |     'Company's Absence in Prosecution Renders Case Void': Himachal High Court Quashes Complaint Against Pharma Directors    |     Preventive Detention Cannot Sacrifice Personal Liberty on Mere Allegations: J&K High Court Quashes Preventive Detention of Local Journalist    |     J.J. Act | Accused's Age at Offense Critical - Juvenility Must Be Addressed: Kerala High Court Directs Special Court to Reframe Charges in POCSO Case    |     Foreign Laws Must Be Proved Like Facts: Delhi HC Grants Bail in Cryptocurrency Money Laundering Case    |    

Punjab and Haryana High Court Dismisses Revision Petition in Cheque Dishonour Case

03 September 2024 10:09 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, presided over by Justice Sudhir Mittal, dismissed a revision petition filed in a cheque dishonour case. The petitioner, Aman Goyal, had challenged his conviction and sentence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

The complaint against the petitioner alleged that he induced the complainant to invest a sum of Rs. 2 crores in a business venture, promising returns if the project did not commence by a specified date. However, the cheque issued by the petitioner for a sum of Rs. 2.33 crores, including interest, was dishonoured, leading to the complaint.

After considering the evidence presented, both the trial court and the appellate court had returned concurrent findings, concluding that the cheque was issued to discharge a legally enforceable liability, and the payment of Rs. 2 crores had been proven. The defense's claim that the complainant fraudulently obtained the petitioner's cheque book by forging his application was disbelieved, as other cheques from the same cheque book were issued and honoured.

Justice Sudhir Mittal, in the judgment, highlighted that the forensic examination of the disputed cheque had confirmed the genuineness of the petitioner's signature. This finding, coupled with the testimony of the witness from the bank and the absence of evidence to support the defense's claim, led the court to uphold the presumption in favor of the complainant under Section 139 of the Act. The court further noted that the judgments relied upon by the petitioner were distinguishable on their facts.

Court held that the revision petition lacked merit and dismissed it. The petitioner's appeal against his conviction and sentence was therefore unsuccessful.

Date: April 25, 2023

Aman Goyal  Versus  Aneet Goel 

Similar News