Last Updated : 07.01.2007

          Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Company - Director - Complaint cannot be quashed on the ground that at the relevant time he was not the Director of Company as this question can only be decided at the trial. (M/s S.B. & T.International Ltd. Vs State of Maharashtra & Anr.) 2006(4) Civil Court Cases 86 (Bombay)

          Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Complainant gave Rs. 2,00,000/- to 'A' - 'A' gave said amount to 'B' who issued cheque of Rs.2,00,000/- in favour of complainant which was dishonoured - 'A' is not liable for prosecution. (Gulshan Kumar Vs Dr.Alka Arora and Anr.) 2006(4) Criminal Court Cases 257 (P&H)

          Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Complaint - Power of attorney holder can file complaint - Sworn statement of power of attorney can be recorded at the very inception - However, during trial payee has to enter the witness box and depose about the legal liability of the drawer, issuance of cheque, presentation of cheque for payment, dishonour of the cheque, issuance of statutory notice, etc. (Muthukaruppan Vs Raghavan) 2006(4) Civil Court Cases 109 (Madras)

          Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Complaint can be filed through power of attorney holder - Power of Attorney holder is competent to speak of facts within his exclusive personal knowledge. (Anirudhan Vs Philip Jacob) 2006(4) Criminal Court Cases 130 (Kerala)

          Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Defence of accused cannot be considered at the stage of taking cognizance and the same can be considered appropriately at the stage of trial. (M/s Prasanna Gases Vs State) 2006(4) Criminal Court Cases 170 (Rajasthan)

          Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Material alteration - Alteration in the year '96' - Amounts to material alteration - Accused acquitted. (Starline Agencies Vs R.B.Agencies) 2006(4) Criminal Court Cases 073 (Kerala)

          Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Notice - Received back 'unclaimed' - Due service of notice is available only when an intimation as to arrival of registered letter in post office is given to addressee and addressee fails to collect it from post office. (Chacko Vs Kurian) 2006(4) Criminal Court Cases 246 (Kerala)

          Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Premature complaint - If cognizance is taken after expiry of 15 days contemplated under Section 138 then premature presentation will not affect the case of the complainant. (Raju Vs Jaiprakash) 2006(4) Criminal Court Cases 166 (Karnataka)

          Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Required ingredients fully proved - Single line in cross examination that first talk of business deal took place in Jan-Feb. 2000 not sufficient to disbelieve complainant's case - Evidence has to be read as a whole - Evidence of PWs. 1 to 3 clearly established fact of transaction between parties prior to 2000 - Presumption u/s 139 in favour of complainant - No evidence led to rebut presumption - Non production of papers of income tax by complainant in trial not a ground to disbelieve complainant's case - Conviction not liable to be interfered with. (Asim Kumar Saha Vs Nepal Mahato & Anr.) 2006(4) Criminal Court Cases 207 (Calcutta)

          Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Supply of goods on credit - Blank cheque issued in respect of uncertain future liability - Cheque dishonoured - Offence u/s 138 cannot be inferred - Cheque issued in respect of future liabilities not in existence as on date of cheque does not attract prosecution u/s 138 of the Act. (M/s.Shreyas Agro Services Pvt.Ltd. Vs Chandrakumar S.B.) 2006(4) Criminal Court Cases 014 (Karnataka)

          Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheques - Cheques issued in advance towards future rental liability - No existing or past liability at the time of issuance of cheque - For prosecution u/s 138 of the Act it is necessary that cheque should have been issued in respect of either past or current existing debt or other legal liability. (Uppinangady Grama Panchayat, Puttur Vs P.Narayana Prabhu) 2006(4) Criminal Court Cases 316 (Karnataka)

          Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - L.R's - Proceedings u/s 138 cannot be initiated against legal heirs of the person who issued the cheque. (Smt.Kamla & Ors. Vs C.P.Bhardwaj) 2006(4) Criminal Court Cases 203 (P&H)

          Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Notice - Demand of double the amount - Provision as to issuance of notice is satisfied when notice is issued within prescribed time, at the correct address with particular details of cheque, their dates, amounts, the date of presentation of the cheques and the dates when the cheques were returned with the endorsement of the bank as to the reasons of dishonour and demand of money - When these particulars are clearly set out in the notice the object of giving notice is satisfied - Drawer is absolved of his liability if payment of amount covered by cheque is made within 15 days of receipt of notice - Notice has to be read as a whole - Reference to the settlement entered into between the parties and liability of the drawer to the tune of double the amount do not render the notice illegal and discharge of the accused. (Balraj Kumar Vs Smt.Kuldeep Kaur) 2006(4) Criminal Court Cases 181 (P&H)

          Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Notice - Proof - A.D. is a clear proof of service of notice. (Mohammed Samdani Basha Vs Syed Issac Basha ) 2006(4) Civil Court Cases 89 (Karnataka)

 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.141 - Dishonour of cheque - Criminal complaint - Statutory requirements - Where Court is required to issue summons which would put the accused to some sort of harassment, Court should insist strict compliance of the statutory requirements. (Sabitha Ramamurthy & Anr. Vs R.B.S.Channabasavardhya) 2006(4) Criminal Court Cases 259 (S.C.)

 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.141 - Criminal complaint - Statutory requirements - Where Court is required to issue summons which would put the accused to some sort of harassment, Court should insist strict compliance of the statutory requirements. (Sabitha Ramamurthy & Anr. Vs R.B.S.Channabasavardhya) 2006(4) Civil Court Cases 01 (S.C.)

 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Ss.138, 141 - Dishonour of cheque - Company - Merely being a director of a company is not sufficient to make the person liable - There should be a clear averment in the complaint that at the time the offence was committed, the person accused was in charge of, and responsible for the conduct of business of the company - Without there being such a averment in the complaint requirement of S.141 cannot be said to be satisfied. (2005(2) Apex Court Judgments 544 (S.C.) : 2005(3) Civil Court Cases 483 (S.C.) : 2005(4) Criminal Court Cases 502 (S.C.) Followed). (Sabitha Ramamurthy & Anr. Vs R.B.S.Channabasavardhya) 2006(4) Criminal Court Cases 259 (S.C.)

          Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Ss.138, 141 - Dishonour of cheque - Partner - Not liable if he merely derives profits from the company - To make a partner liable he must be in charge of and responsible to the firm in the conduct of business of firm. (Mohandas Vs Jayasamudri Trading Co.) 2006(4) Criminal Court Cases 346 (Kerala)

          Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Ss.138, 9 - Dishonour of cheque - Holder in due course - Purchaser of cheque is holder in due course if there is an endorsement in favour of the purchaser. (Bhartiya Khand & Gur Udyogshala Vs Punjab National Bank) 2006(4) Criminal Court Cases 021 (P&H)

          Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Ss.138 and 139 - Dishonour of cheque - Holder in due course - Means any person who for consideration became the possessor of promissory note, bill of exchange or cheque if payable to bearer or the payee or indorsee thereof - 'A' gave loan to 'B' - Bank purchased cheque from 'B' - 'B' made an endorsement in favour of Bank - Bank becomes holder in due course - Cheque dishonoured - Complaint against 'A' maintainable. (Bhartiya Khand & Gur Udyogshala Vs Punjab National Bank) 2006(4) Criminal Court Cases 021 (P&H)

 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.200 - Dishonour of cheque - Criminal complaint - Prosecution if ultimately found to be frivolous or otherwise mala fide, Court may direct registration of case against complainant for mala fide prosecution of accused - Accused is also entitled to file a suit for damages. (Sabitha Ramamurthy & Anr. Vs R.B.S.Channabasavardhya) 2006(4) Criminal Court Cases 259 (S.C.) : 2006(4) Civil Court Cases 01 (S.C.)

          Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.256 - Dishonour of cheque - Absence of complainant - Dismissal of complaint - Dismissal of complaint for non appearance can only be when personal attendance of complainant is essential on that day for the progress of the case and situation does not justify the case being adjourned to another date due to any other reason - Compliant cannot be dismissed for default simply on the ground that complainant was not present on the date of hearing - Complaint restored. (R.Murali Vs D.Udhayakumar) 2006(4) Criminal Court Cases 205 (Madras)

          Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.29 - Dishonour of cheque - Power of Magistrate to impose sentence of fine exceeding Rs.5000/- - Accused convicted under Section 138 of N.I. Act - Magistrate can only impose a sentence of fine not exceeding Rs.5000/- - In view of provisions of S.29 Cr.P.C. imposition of penalty or fine of Rs.1,50,000/- by Magistrate not proper. (Asim Kumar Saha Vs Nepal Mahato & Anr.) 2006(4) Criminal Court Cases 207 (Calcutta)

          Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.357 - Dishonour of cheque - Conviction - Appeal against - Suspension of sentence - Appellate Court has power to direct payment of compensation, in whole or any part thereof, awarded by Magistrate as a condition precedent for suspending substantive sentence. (Dilip S.Dahanukar Vs Kotak Mahindra Co. Ltd. & Anr.) 2006(4) Civil Court Cases 198 (Bombay) : 2006(4) Criminal Court Cases 015 (Bombay)

          Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S.397 - Conviction u/s 138 NI Act - Death during pendency of revision - Held, even after the death of the accused who is the revision petitioner the revision petition survives and Court can pass appropriate orders with regard to the sentence of fine. (Viswanathan Vs State of Kerala) 2006(4) Criminal Court Cases 255 (Kerala)

          Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Ss.406, 420, 120-B - Loan money - Cheque issued for return of loan - Petitioner alleged to have persuaded complainant to give loan in question to accused No.1 and loan so given misappropriated by accused No.1 - Nothing stated against petitioner - Proceedings against petitioner quashed. (Sachida Nand Prasad Vs State of Bihar & Anr.) 2006(4) Criminal Court Cases 047 (Patna)

          Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Different cheque number - Cheque number different than that reflected in the settlement deed entered into between the partners - Factum of agreement of liability admitted - Number of cheque presented, number of cheque reflected in notice and number of cheque mentioned in complaint same - Drawer of cheque cannot take any benefit of different number being mentioned in settlement deed - Question of liability is a matter of defence that can be raised at the appropriate stage - Court not to consider this issue in the context of the settlement at the stage of charge or discharge of the accused. (Balraj Kumar Vs Smt.Kuldeep Kaur) 2006(4) Criminal Court Cases 181 (P&H)

          Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - A person who issues the cheque which ultimately turns out to be bad is the person on whom the liability can be fastened under the Act - If a cheque has been issued by some other person from his account then in that eventuality nobody except the person who draws this cheque can be held liable. (Gulshan Kumar Vs Dr.Alka Arora and Anr.) 2006(4) Criminal Court Cases 257 (P&H)

          Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Cause of action - Accrual - Cheque presented twice - On dishonour of cheque for the first time an intimation given that cheque is dishonoured for want of sufficient fund - Mere giving an intimation without demand of cheque amount is not a notice within the meaning of S.138 of the Act - Held, cause of action arose when notice of demand was issued on dishonour of cheque for the second time and complaint filed thereafter - Held, complaint is within time. (Bank of Baroda Vs Philip Thomas) 2006(4) Criminal Court Cases 053 (Kerala)

          Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Cheque signed by authorised signatory - Held, on cheque being dishonoured it is the principal who is liable. (Mohammed Samdani Basha Vs Syed Issac Basha ) 2006(4) Civil Court Cases 89 (Karnataka)

          Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Cheques issued in advance towards future rental liability - Premises taken on rent - Premises vacated before the expiry of lease period in breach of agreement - Held, there is no legal obligation on the part of accused to effect clearance of cheque issued towards the rental liabilities for the period he is not in occupation - Remedy available is to sue for damages for breach of contract. (Uppinangady Grama Panchayat, Puttur Vs P.Narayana Prabhu) 2006(4) Criminal Court Cases 316 (Karnataka)

          Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, S.138 - Dishonour of cheque - Civil suit - Pendency of - Not a bar for launching proceedings u/s 138 Negotiable Instruments Act. (Raju Vs Jaiprakash) 2006(4) Criminal Court Cases 166 (Karnataka)