Man walks free in cheque bounce case

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, May 6

A local court has acquitted a person in a cheque bounce case after the complainant failed to prove the loan transaction between him and the accused.

Shiv Kumar Gulati, a resident of Sector 35-A, Chandigarh, in a complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act – 1881, stated that the accused, identified as Pushpendra Kumar, a resident of Sector 15, Panchkula, was known to him for several years.

He said the accused was in need of financial help and he requested him to pay a loan of Rs 2.50 lakh. He assured that he would repay the loan within a short span of time. He requested the accused to pay the loan after some time, but he deferred the payment on one pretext or the other.

After several requests, the accused issued a cheque dated July 2, 2018 for Rs 2.50 lakh drawn at Standard Chartered Bank, Sector 8-C, Chandigarh, with an assurance that there was sufficient amount in his account.

When the cheque was presented, it returned with remarks “Funds Insufficient” on July 10, 2018. Gulati said when he informed him about the cheque, the accused threatened him with dire consequences and refused to pay the amount.

Shaurya Bhatia, advocate of the accused, argued that he was falsely implicated in the case. He argued that the complainant, in his cross-examination, admitted that the alleged amount of Rs 2,50 lakh was given to a cloth merchant, Sector 20, by him through his credit card and not to the accused. The complainant also did not mention either in his legal notice, complaint or in his evidence by way of affidavit that in which month or year he paid the alleged amount to the accused.

After hearing the arguments, the court acquitted the accused. The court said in the present case no loan transaction between complainant Shiv Kumar Gulati and accused Pushpendra had been proved on record. The complainant produced the credit card statement of his bank wherein he had made two transactions of Rs 1,50,000 and Rs 65,000 to one Bimla Trader and the said payment was not given to the accused. It is a settled preposition of law that the complainant must prove the guilt of the accused on record that the cheque amount was due towards him. From all facts and circumstances, it was clear that accused Pushpendra had no legal liability towards the complainant.

About The Author

Tribune News Service

The Tribune News Service brings you the latest news, analysis and insights from the region, India and around the world. Follow the Tribune News Service for a wide-ranging coverage of events as they unfold, with perspective and clarity.