Back
2007 Supreme(AP) 155
Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : K.C.BHANU
BEZAWADA MOTOR STORES - Appellant
Versus
SARALA DOULAT RAM - Respondent
Decided On : 02/09/2007
Criminal Petition 5381 Of 2006
Headnote:
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 482 – Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 – Sections 130 and 138 – Cheque drawn – Dishonour of cheque – Seeking to quash the compliant is that the cheque was obtained with a specific express agreement that same was not negotiable – Only ground on which the petitioners seek to quash compliant is that the cheque was obtained with a specific express agreement that the same was not negotiable – None appears for the petitioners – Hence this Court proceeded to peruse grounds for quashing proceedings and decide the case – A perusal of Section 130 of Act, 1881 lays down effect of cheque on which words not negotiable is endorsed – Further, Section 131 of Act postulates non-liability of a banker receiving payment of cheque and that banker who has in good faith and without negligence received payment for a customer of a cheque crossed generally or specifically to himself shall not, in case the title to cheque proves defective, incur any liability to true owner of cheque by reason only of having received such payment – Held, It is pertinent to notice that Section 138 of Act prescribes that where any cheque drawn by person on an account maintained by him with a banker for payment of any amount of money to another person from out of that account for the discharge, in whole or in part, of any debt or other liability, is returned the bank unpaid, either because of the amount of money standing to the credit of that account is insufficient to honour the cheque or that it exceeds amount arranged to be paid from that account by an agreement made with that bank, such person shall be deemed to have committed an offence – In the instant case, cheque was issued with an endorsement on it as not negotiable – Whether endorsement made on cheque as not negotiable or other wise, is immaterial for the purpose of committing an offence under section 138 of Act and, therefore, it is a matter to be decided basing on the evidence to be adduced during the trial – It is needles to state that any observation made in this order is only for the purpose of deciding this petition and it is open to the petitioners to raise all the contentions including one raised in this petition before the trial Court and all such contentions have to be decided on merits by the trial Court in accordance with law – Petition dismissed.
( 2 ) NONE appears for the petitioners. Hence this Court proceeded to peruse the grounds for quashing the proceedings and decide the case.
( 3 ) A perusal of Section 130 of the negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'the Act')lays down the effect of cheque on which the words 'not negotiable' is endorsed.
( 4 ) FURTHER, Section 131 of the Act postulates non-liability of a banker receiving payment of cheque and that the banker who has in good faith and without negligence received payment for a customer of a cheque crossed generally or specifically to himself shall not, in case the title to the cheque proves defective, incur any liability to the true owner of the cheque by reason only of having received such payment.
( 5 ) IT is pertinent to notice that Section 138 of the Act prescribes that where any cheque drawn by the person on an account maintained by him with a banker for payment of any amount of money to another person from out of that account for the discharge, in whole or in part, of any debt or other liability, is returned the bank unpaid, either because of the amount of money standing to the credit of that account is insufficient to honour the cheque or that it exceeds the amount arranged to be paid from that account by an agreement made with that bank, such person shall be deemed to have committed an offence.
( 6 ) IN the instant case, the cheque was issued with an endorsement on it as 'not negotiable'. A plain reading of Section 138 of the Act would clearly indicate that there is no distinction between ordinary cheque and cheque with an endorsement as 'not negotiable'. The opening words of the provision start with 'any cheque' which means all the cheques. Therefore, on this ground alone, the proceedings cannot be quashed. Whether the endorsement made on the cheque as 'not negotiable' orotherwise, is immaterial forthe purpose of committing an offence under section 138 of the Act and, therefore, it is a matter to be decided basing on the evidence to be adduced during the trial. It is needles to state that any observation made in this order is only for the purpose of deciding this petition and it is open to the petitioners to raise all the contentions including the one raised in this petition before the trial Court and all such contentions have to be decided on merits by the trial Court in accordance with law.
( 7 ) IN the circumstances, there is no merit in this petition and the petition is liable to be dismissed.
( 8 ) THE petition is accordingly dismissed.
.
