Supreme Court Lays Down Comprehensive Guidelines To Prevent Misuse Of POCSO Act In Matrimonial Disputes Land Reforms Act | Joint Application For Pre-Emption By Adjoining Landowners Is Maintainable: Calcutta High Court Ocular Evidence In Conflict With Medical Findings Or Withholding Of Natural Witnesses Vitiates Prosecution Case: Allahabad High Court Compassionate Appointment Claim Must Be Decided Based On Policy Prevalent At Time Of Death: Bombay High Court Section 376 IPC | Failure To Prove Initial Dishonest Intent In Marriage Promise Renders Sexual Relationship Consensual: Allahabad High Court Prolonged Incarceration And Delay In Trial Are Valid Grounds To Invoke Constitutional Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 In UAPA Cases: Delhi High Court Motor Vehicles Act | Insurer Liable To Pay And Recover Compensation For Gratuitous Passengers In Goods Vehicles: Gujarat High Court Proof Of Demand And Acceptance Under PC Act Must Be Evaluated Based On Preponderance Of Probabilities In Rebuttal: Kerala High Court Tenancy Claim | Mere Possession Without Lawful Foundation Or Identification Of Tenanted Land Cannot Confer Occupancy Rights: Karnataka High Court 125 CrPC | Maintenance Cannot Be Evaded By Claiming Physical Disability If Conduct Indicates Concealment Of Financial Means: Kerala High Court M.P. Municipal Corporation Act | Locus Standi Under Section 307(5) Limited To Residents Of The Municipal Area: Madhya Pradesh High Court Writ Jurisdiction | Belated Challenge To Disciplinary Action After Superannuation Amounts To Laches; Petition Dismissed: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC | Mere Pendency Of Partition Suit Does Not Entitle Plaintiff To Injunction Restraining Reconstruction Of Residential Building: Kerala High Court Not A Mere Breach Of Contract: Telangana High Court Refuses To Quash FIR In ₹73 Crore Garment Investment Fraud Section 482 CrPC | High Court Quashes FIR Following Private Compromise In Non-Heinous Dispute Arising From Civil Conflict Mere Involvement In Criminal Case Does Not Constitute Moral Turpitude To Deny Public Appointment: Telangana High Court Pendency Of Investigation Cannot Be A Blanket Ground To Deny Permission For Foreign Travel: Rajasthan High Court Fraudulent Representation By Counsel Vitiates Ex Parte Decree: Punjab & Haryana High Court Holds Professional Misconduct As Evidence Of Fraud Writ Jurisdiction | Suppression Of Material Facts Regarding Pending Criminal And Departmental Proceedings Renders Petition Liable To Dismissal: Orissa High Court Banking Fraud | Failure Of Bank Official To Conduct Physical Inspection Of Collateral Property Constitutes Criminal Conspiracy And Abuse Of Official Position: Madras High Court Fraud Vitiates Judicial Proceedings: Judgment Obtained Through Misrepresentation And Conflict Of Interest Cannot Be Sustained, Holds Punjab And Haryana High Court Discovery Under Section 27 Evidence Act From Publicly Accessible Place Requires Caution: Supreme Court Mere Recovery Of Articles At Instance Of Accused Without Independent Corroboration Cannot Sustain Conviction: Supreme Court DNA Profile Must Be Supported By Other Conclusive Evidence To Prove Guilt: Supreme Court

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 

Latest Legal News