Case Summary
Complainant alleged that the accused issued a cheque, which bounced due to 'account closed', leading to a legal action u/s 138 of The Negotiable Instruments Act.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Acquittal under u/s. 255(1) CrPC
Case Type
Criminal Case - Cheque Dishonour
Final Judgment
No
The accused was found not guilty of the offence punishable u/s 138 of The Negotiable Instruments Act.
Key Reasoning:
The complainant failed to establish that the accused issued the cheque for consideration and in discharge of liability.
The complainant failed to establish that the accused issued the cheque for consideration and in discharge of liability.
Why Defendant Won:
The complainant failed to establish that the accused issued the cheque for consideration and in discharge of liability.
The complainant failed to establish that the accused issued the cheque for consideration and in discharge of liability.
Supporting Evidence
the complainant has failed to establish that Exhibit P1 cheque was issued by the accused for consideration and in discharge of liability.
Judgment Evidence:
The Honourable Supreme Court in John K.Abrahamand another [2014 (1) KLT 901] has held that "in order to draw presumption under section 118 read along with 139 of the N.I.Act, burden is heavily upon the complainant to show that he had required funds for having advanced the money to the accused; that the issuance of the cheque in support of the said payment advanced was true and the accused was bound to make the payment as had been agreed while issuing the cheque in favour of the complainant".
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Jayakumar
- Party Age
- 53
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Ummar Muhthar
- Party Age
- 26
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Memo issued by HDFC Bank, Memo issued by Tirur Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd., Copy of lawyer notice, Postal receipt, Reply Notice
Defendants Documents
Not available
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- Sri. .Dinesh Pookayil
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Sri. V. Chandrasekaran
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Acquittal
Outcome:
Granted
Description:
Accused found not guilty of the offence punishable u/s 138 of The Negotiable Instruments Act
Evidence:
The complainant failed to establish that the accused issued the cheque for consideration and in discharge of liability.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Memo
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Memo issued by HDFC Bank
Reference:
Ext.P2
Document Type:
Memo
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Memo issued by Tirur Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd.
Reference:
Ext.P3
Document Type:
Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Copy of lawyer notice
Reference:
Ext.P4
Document Type:
Receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Postal receipt
Reference:
Ext.P5
Document Type:
Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Reply Notice
Reference:
Ext.P6
Case Classification
Case Type
Criminal Case - Cheque Dishonour
Category
Cheque Bounce Cases
District
Malappuram
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Tirur / Rent Control Court
Common Reasons
Non-payment of debt
Case Code
Case between Jayakumar vs Ummar Muhthar regarding Cheque Dishonour
Case Code Year
Case between Jayakumar vs Ummar Muhthar regarding Cheque Dishonour
Case Flags
Cheque-Related Case
Nature of Cheque Case