Case Summary
Rejimon Joseph filed a complaint against Radhakrishnan alleging a dishonored cheque under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court found the accused not guilty and acquitted him.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Criminal Case
Final Judgment
No
The court acquitted the accused, Radhakrishnan, for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
Key Reasoning:
The complainant failed to prove the existence of a legally enforceable liability.
The complainant failed to prove the existence of a legally enforceable liability.
Why Defendant Won:
The complainant failed to prove the existence of a legally enforceable liability.
The complainant failed to prove the existence of a legally enforceable liability.
Supporting Evidence
The complainant failed to prove that there existed a legally enforceable liability of ₹. 4,00,000/- (Rupees Four lakh only) by the accused to attract the offence u/S. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and the accused was able to rebut the presumptions in favour of the complainant.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the accused is found not guilty of the offence punishable u/s. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, and he is acquitted under Section 255 (1) of the CrPC.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Rejimon Joseph
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Radhakrishnan
- Party Age
- 55
- Relation
- S/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Cheque bearing No.242760 dated 20.09.2019 for ₹.4.00,000/- drawn on South Indian Bank Ltd. Kothanellur branch, Dishonour memo dated 25.09.2019, Office copy of lawyer's notice dated 21.10.2019, Postal receipt dated 21.10.2019, A/D card dated 31.10.2019.
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- D. Subhash Chandran
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Biju T.S
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Cheque
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Accused executed and issued Ext.P1 cheque in favour of the complainant.
Reference:
Ext.P1
Document Type:
Dishonour memo
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Dishonour memo dated 25.09.2019 evidenced the dishonour of the cheque due to insufficient funds.
Reference:
Ext.P2
Document Type:
Lawyer's Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
The complainant issued Ext.P3 demand notice to the accused within 30 days of dishonour.
Reference:
Ext.P3
Document Type:
Postal receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Postal receipt dated 21.10.2019 evidenced the sending of the demand notice.
Reference:
Ext.P4
Document Type:
Acknowledgment card
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Acknowledgment card dated 31.10.2019 confirmed receipt of the notice by the accused.
Reference:
Ext.P5
Case Classification
Case Type
Criminal Case
Category
Cheque Bounce Cases
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court Vaikom
Common Reasons
Cheque dishonour
Case Code
ST
Case Code Year
2019
Case Flags
Cheque-Related Case
Nature of Cheque Case
Cheque Dishonour under Section 138 N.I. Act