Mere Pendency of Appeal Does Not Bar Eviction Suit – Res Judicata Not Attracted Where Issues Are Not Identical: Andhra Pradesh High Court Right to Speedy Trial is a Fundamental Right under Article 21: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Bail Despite Recovery of Commercial Quantity Encroachments on River Puramboke Cannot Be Legalised or Protected Under the Guise of Long President was deemed to know that the property vested with the Municipal Council, yet failed to protect it: Karnataka High Court Upholds Disqualification of Municipal President for Misconduct Once the Term of Committee Ends, Right to Vote Ceases — Even if Name Remains in Voter List: Gujarat High Court Treating Equals Unequally Violates Article 14: Bombay High Court Strikes Down IOCL's Tiebreaker rule Preferring Younger Candidate in Tender Selection Mere Harassment Over Loan Recovery Not Abetment to Suicide: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Acquittal in Vineet Kundu Case Taxpayer Cannot Be Penalized For Department's Mistake In Deposit Of GST — Allahabad High Court Directs NOIDA To Compensate The Taxpayer For Wrongful Imposition Of Tax And Penalty “When Large-Scale Fraud Vitiates Selection, En Masse Cancellation Is Inevitable: Supreme Court Validates Quashing of WBSSC 2016 Recruitment Reopening Based on Wrong Mutual Fund is No Reopening at All — Gujarat High Court Quashes Income Tax Notice for Lack of Nexus Between Allegation and Actual Transaction Exceeding Official Duty Does Not Automatically Remove Section 197 CrPC Protection: Supreme Court Quashed Proceedings Against Police Officials Possession Of A Higher Qualification Cannot Substitute The Qualification Prescribed Under  Rules: Supreme Court Upholds Rejection Of Candidate Without Required Lascar’s Licence Dismissal for Default Without Considering COVID Restrictions Was Illegal: Supreme Court Section 256 CrPC Does Not Mandate Automatic Acquittal On Complainant’s Absence — Judicial Satisfaction Is Mandatory: Supreme Court

U/S 138 N.I. Act: Continuation of Proceedings Would Constitute Misuse of Legal Process: High Court in Cheque Dishonour Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has quashed the criminal complaint and subsequent proceedings in a cheque dishonour case involving M/s Realtech Developments and Infrastructure (India) Pvt. Ltd and others against Ranbir Singh. The case, presided over by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, centered on a cheque for ₹36,76,234 issued by the petitioners, which exceeded the actual agreed refund amount of ₹23,54,573 to the respondent.

The complaint, initially filed under Sections 138/141/142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, sought prosecution of the petitioners following the dishonour of the cheque. The cheque in question was issued as part of a refund for a flat booking made by the respondent with the petitioners. However, due to a recession in the real estate market, the respondent requested a refund, leading to the disputed transaction.

In his judgement, Justice Gupta noted, “Having regard to all the afore-said facts and circumstances, continuation of the proceedings in the complaint will be misuse of the process of law.” This observation underlines the court’s stance on the misuse of legal proceedings in cases where the facts and intentions are clear and undisputed.

The court recognized that the petitioners had already refunded the agreed amount of ₹23,54,573 to the complainant. It was established that the issuance of a cheque for an inflated amount was a mistake, and not an intentional act of fraud or deceit.

Furthermore, the court noted that the respondent’s calculation sheet, which suggested a higher refund amount, was prepared independently and was neither executed nor agreed upon by the petitioners.

 Date of Decision: 12 January 2024

 M/s Realtech Developments and Infrastructure (India) Pvt. Ltd and others VS Ranbir Singh

 

Similar News