Case Summary
The complainant, Thampi P. Mani, alleged that the accused, Mini Muhammed, failed to return money given for a job visa, resulting in dishonour of a cheque. The court found the accused not guilty of the charges.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Criminal Case
Final Judgment
No
The court acquitted the accused, Mini Muhammed, of the charges under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The complainant failed to prove the existence of a legally enforceable debt.
Key Reasoning:
The complainant failed to prove that the accused issued the cheque in discharge of a legally enforceable debt.
The complainant failed to prove that the accused issued the cheque in discharge of a legally enforceable debt.
Why Defendant Won:
The complainant failed to prove that the accused issued the cheque in discharge of a legally enforceable debt.
The complainant failed to prove that the accused issued the cheque in discharge of a legally enforceable debt.
Supporting Evidence
Considering the evidence in its totality, the complainant failed to prove that the accused issued Ext. P1 cheque in discharge of a legally enforceable debt.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the accused is found not guilty of the offence punishable u/s. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, and she is acquitted under Section 255 (1) of the CrPC.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Thampi P. Mani
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Akhil V. Babu
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Mini Muhammed
- Party Age
- 50
Plaintiffs Documents
Cheque bearing No.000022 dated 30.09.2019 for ₹.2,65,000/- of Kotak Mahindra Bank, Dishonour memo dated 03.10.2019, Office copy of lawyer's notice dated 22.10.2019, True copy of the registered notice, Returned notice with A/d card
Defendants Documents
True copy of CMP No.8910/2019
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- K.S Sreenivasan
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- N. Sreejith
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Not Decided
Description:
Determination of the accused's guilt regarding the charge under Section 138 of N.I. Act.
Evidence:
In view of the findings on Points No.1 to 3, it is found that the accused has not committed the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Cheque
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Accused issued a cheque to the complainant for the recovery of a debt.
Reference:
Ext.P1
Document Type:
Dishonour memo
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Memo indicating that the cheque was returned due to insufficient funds.
Reference:
Ext.P2
Document Type:
Lawyer's Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Notice sent to the accused demanding the cheque amount after dishonour.
Reference:
Ext.P3
Document Type:
Registered Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
True copy of the notice sent to the accused.
Reference:
Ext.P4
Document Type:
Returned notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Returned acknowledgment card of the notice sent to the accused.
Reference:
Ext.P5
Document Type:
Complaint
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
True copy of a previous case filed by the accused.
Reference:
Ext.D1
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
2023
Case Flags
Cheque-Related Case
Nature of Cheque Case
Cheque Dishonour under Section 138 N.I. Act