SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
V.S. Aggarwal, J.
Om Parkash - Petitioner
versus
Gurcharan Singh - Respondent
Criminal Misc. No. 13949-M of 1996
Decided on 29-5-1997
Counsel for the parties:
For the Petitioner: -Mr. T.S. Sangha, Advocate.
For the Respondent: None.

IMPORTANT POINT
For complaint u/s 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, cheque must be presented to bank on which it is drawn within 6 months of date cheque is issued.
`

Headnote:Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Section 138 - Cheque has to be presented within period of six months from date on which it was drawn - It has to be presented to the Bank on which it was drawn within that period - Cheque issued to respondent-complainant dated 17-5-1993 was presented to petitioner's bank on 22-11-1993 by complainant's banker - It was presented by complainant to his banker on 16-11-1993 - Since cheque was presented to petitioner accused bank after six months from the date on which it was drawn, complaint was not maintainable. (Para 5)

       Result: Petition allowed.

       

JUDGMENT

V.S. Aggarwal. J. - This is a petition filed by Om Parkash (hereinafter described as 'the petitioner') seeking quashing of the complaint and the subsequent summoning order regarding the petitioner as an accused.

2. The relevant facts are that respondent-Gurcharan Singh filed a criminal complaint against the petitioner with respect to the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short 'the Act'). It was contended that petitioner had issued a cheque dated 17-5-1993 for Rs. 28,000/- to the respondent against part payment of the amount. The respondent presented the said cheque to his banker (State Bank of India. Naraingarh). It was dishonoured by the banker of the petitioner i.e. State Bank of Patiala, Ropar vide endorsement dated 22-11-1993. The banker of the respondent informed him regarding dishonouring of the cheque on 24-11-1993. The respondent issued a notice dated 6-12-1993 with a direction to remit the amount of the cheque. Despite the said notice, the payment had not been made. On these broad facts complaint with respect to Section 138 of the Act was filed. The learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambala after recording the preliminary evidence summoned the petitioner as an accused with respect to the abovesaid offence.

3. The petitioner seeks quashing of the complaint and the summoning order alleging that respondent had submitted the cheque to the State Bank of India, Naraingarh on 16-11-1993. The banker of the respondent sent the cheque to State Bank of Patiala, Ropar on 22-11-1993 and was dishonoured on that date. As per the petitioner, the presenting of the cheque to the banker of the petitioner was done after expiry of six months and consequently, the complaint was not maintainable.

4. Notice of the petition had been issued to the respondent who did not submit any reply and even when the case was listed for arguments, no appearance was put on behalf of the respondent. In these circumstances, the Court did not have the advantage of hearing the submissions' of the respondent's counsel.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner urged that under Section 138 of the Act, the cheque has to be presented to the Bank from where the amount has been drawn. He relied on the fact that expression used is "the bank". Reliance was further placed on Section 72 of the Act, which prescribes that subject to provisions of Section 84, a cheque must. in order to charge the drawer be presented to the bank upon which it is drawn before the relation between the drawer and the bank has been altered to the prejudice of the drawer. The said submission has merit. Section 138 of the Act reads:

"138. Dishonour of cheque for insufficiency, etc. of funds in the account. Where any cheque drawn by a 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 by 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 and shall without prejudice to any other provision of this Act, be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year or with fine which may extend to twice the amount of the cheque or with both:

Provided that nothing contained in this section shall apply unless-(a) the cheque has presented to the bank within a period of six months from the date on which it is drawn or within the period of its validity, whichever is earlier;

(b) the payee or the holder in due course of the cheque as the case may be, makes a demand for the payment of the said amount of money by giving a notice in writing to the drawer of the cheque, within fifteen days of the receipt of information by him from the bank regarding the re







Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top