Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 10 views

    DS Shridhar Vs P John and Ors 13122022 TLHCTL2022061123155811209COM828571

    Uploaded by

    swapnilgoal
    .

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    DS Shridhar Vs P John and Ors 13122022 TLHCTL2022061123155811209COM828571

    Uploaded by

    swapnilgoal
    10 views2 pages
    .

    Original Title

    DS_Shridhar_vs_P_John_and_Ors_13122022__TLHCTL2022061123155811209COM828571

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    .

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    10 views2 pages

    DS Shridhar Vs P John and Ors 13122022 TLHCTL2022061123155811209COM828571

    Uploaded by

    swapnilgoal
    .

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 2

    MANU/TL/2690/2022

    Equivalent/Neutral Citation: 2023 (2) ALD(C rl.) 436

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF STATE OF TELANGANA


    Criminal Petition No. 3492 of 2022
    Decided On: 13.12.2022
    D.S. Shridhar Vs. P. John and Ors.
    Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
    K. Surender, J.
    Counsels:
    For Appellant/Petitioner/Plaintiff: Gujjari Naveen Kumar
    For Respondents/Defendant: P. Santosh Kumar Goud and S. Sudershan, Addl. Public
    Prosecutor
    ORDER
    K. Surender, J.
    1 . Petitioner is questioning the complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable
    Instruments Act mainly on the ground that the reasons given by the banker while
    returning the cheque does not confirm to the twin reasons assigned under Section 138
    of the Negotiable Instruments Act for prosecuting a drawer of the cheque.
    2 . The case of the complainant is that the complainant took hand loan of Rs. 30.00
    lakhs on 05.07.2018 in the house of the complainant in the presence of witnesses. A
    cheque was also issued on the very same day for Rs. 30.00 lakhs. The said cheque was
    presented for clearance and the same was returned unpaid on 17.07.2018 for the reason
    of 'kindly contact drawer/drawee bank and present again'. Again the said cheque was
    presented for clearance, which was returned on 16.08.2018 for the reason of 'kindly
    contact drawer/drawee bank and please present again'.
    3. Under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, prosecution can be launched if
    the cheque is returned unpaid for the reason of 'insufficient funds' or 'it exceeds
    arrangement to be paid'. The Hon'ble Supreme Court held that apart from two reasons,
    if the reasons are 'account closed' and 'payment stopped' by the drawer' are also liable
    under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
    4. As seen from the cheque, it was printed in the year 2008. The Bank has returned the
    cheque by specifically mentioning reason of 'kindly contact drawer/drawee bank and
    please present again' which is in the handwriting of the banker stating that drawer or
    drawee bank has to be contacted and then present the cheque.
    5 . As stated in the complaint, the question of returning the cheque for 'insufficient
    funds' does not arise. As seen from the cheque return memo, the reason of 'funds
    insufficient' is number 6. The Bank has returned twice for the reason 19 stating 'kindly
    contact drawer/drawee bank and please present again' which was handwritten. When
    the reason for returning the cheque does not conform to the twin requirements
    mentioned under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act or if the account is

    16-07-2024 (Page 1 of 2) www.manupatra.com Uttaranchal University


    closed and payment stopped by drawer as stated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the
    reason mentioned by the Banker to contact the drawer or drawee bank and present
    again will not amount to a reason for which, the prosecution under Section 138 of the
    Negotiable Instruments Act can be launched.
    6. If the complainant is aggrieved and in the facts of the case if an offence of cheating
    as defined under Section 415 of IPC is made out, complainant is at liberty to prosecute
    accordingly. Since there are no ingredients to launch prosecution under Section 138 of
    the Negotiable Instruments Act, the proceedings against the petitioner are liable to be
    quashed.
    7. In the result, the proceedings against the petitioner in CC No. 287 of 2018 on the file
    of Judicial First Class Magistrate at Zaheerabad, are hereby quashed.
    8 . Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. Miscellaneous applications, pending if
    any, shall stand closed.
    © Manupatra Information Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

    16-07-2024 (Page 2 of 2) www.manupatra.com Uttaranchal University

    You might also like