Mere Reproduction Of Evidence Can Never Be Equated With Appreciation: Karnataka High Court Quashes Penalty Against Govt Employee Accused Cannot Repeatedly Send Cheque To FSL Till Favourable Report Is Obtained: Kerala High Court In NI Act Case Succession Certificate Cannot Be Issued For Gold Jewels Pledged With Bank, Applies Only To Debts And Securities: Madras High Court Order 11 Rule 14 CPC | Court Cannot Direct Production Of Documents Without Ascertaining They Are In Party's Possession: Calcutta High Court Undertrial Prisoners Don't Suffer 'Civil Death', Retain Fundamental Right To Alienate Property From Jail: Rajasthan High Court Direction For Reasonable Annual Enhancement Of Maintenance Under Section 125 CrPC Merely Preserves Its Real Value Against Inflation: Delhi High Court Testimony Of Sole Interested Witness Must Be Of 'Sterling Quality' To Base Conviction: Patna High Court Acquits Murder Convict Failure To Communicate Written Grounds Of Arrest Renders Arrest Constitutionally Infirm, Accused Entitled To Bail: Punjab & Haryana High Court Section 482 CrPC Petition Not Maintainable Against Order Framing Charge Under SC/ST Act, Appeal Lies Under Section 14A: Tripura High Court Disputed Questions Of Fact Regarding Title And Forged Documents Cannot Be Decided Under Article 226: Telangana High Court Matter To Be Enquired By Bar Council: Madhya Pradesh High Court Dismisses Lawyer's PILs With Costs For Suppressing Attorney-Client Relationship BDA Cannot Arbitrarily Reverse Resolutions Passed To Comply With Judicial Directives: Karnataka High Court Section 52A NDPS Act: Mere Non-Compliance Does Not Automatically Vitiate Trial Unless Evidence Is Doubtful: Punjab & Haryana High Court Seniority Must Be Determined From Date Of Substantive Appointment, Not Ad-Hoc Service: Allahabad High Court Uncorroborated Testimony Of Drug Inspector Cannot Form Sole Basis For Conviction Under Drugs Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court Suppression Of Adverse Facts Strikes At Root Of Equitable Jurisdiction: Bombay High Court Denies Injunction In HUF Property Dispute

U/S 138 N.I. Act | Signature Admittance Overrules Need for Forensic Scrutiny: Gujarat High Court Dismisses Quashing Petition

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a notable judgment, the Gujarat High Court, led by Honourable Mr. Justice Hasmukh D. Suthar, rejected a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The petition aimed at quashing orders from lower courts in a cheque dishonour case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Petitioner Parimal Maheshbhai Solanki admitted to his signature on the cheque but disputed the other writings. The Court, emphasizing the significance of the admitted signature, ruled against the necessity for forensic examination of the cheque’s writings.

The judgment hinged on the legal principle concerning the quashing of lower court orders in a dishonoured cheque case, focusing on the authenticity and the admittance of the petitioner’s signature versus the disputed writings on the cheque.

The complainant claimed that a cheque for Rs. 7,00,000 issued by the petitioner was dishonoured due to a blocked account. The petitioner acknowledged his signature on the cheque while disputing the writings, alleging misuse. Earlier, both the trial court and the revisional court dismissed the petitioner’s request for forensic analysis, pointing out that the signature was not disputed and the petitioner failed to establish a credible misuse defense.

Justice Suthar noted that the admittance of the signature on the cheque triggers a legal presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Citing cases like Kalamani Tex vs. P. Balasubramanian and Rajesh Jain vs. Ajay Singh, the court held that there was no merit in sending the cheque for forensic examination when the signature itself was undisputed. The court distinguished this case from precedents where a bona fide defense about cheque misuse was established, observing the lack of such defense in the present case.

The High Court dismissed the petition, reinforcing the position that the admittance of the signature on the cheque diminishes the relevance of disputes over the writings on it. The absence of a credible defense or additional evidence from the petitioner led to the affirmation of the lower courts’ decisions.

Date of Decision: 12/02/2024

Parimal Maheshbhai Solanki vs. State of Gujarat

Latest Legal News