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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 31578

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J
Vijayakumar – Appellant
Versus
A.Madhavan – Respondent
Criminal Revision Case|C.A.No.28 of 2018|STC No.55 of 2017



Advocates:
For Petitioner: M/s.Hemalatha for Mr.Vijayaraghavan
For Respondent: Mr.Yuvaraj for Mr.Swami Subramani

Conditional acquittal in cheque bounce case upon settling remaining amount after partial payment.

Headnote:Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act punishes dishonour of cheques due to insufficient funds. The complainant alleged that the petitioner borrowed Rs.2,00,000/- and issued a cheque on 20.07.2017, which was dishonoured. The trial court convicted the petitioner, sentencing six months imprisonment and compensation; appellate court confirmed. The court found legally enforceable debt proven through evidence (Exs.P1-P5). Issue: Whether conviction under Section 138 upheld despite partial payment. Ratio: Partial repayment of Rs.1,00,000/- acknowledged; balance settlement justified conditional acquittal to promote resolution. Criminal revision allowed; conviction set aside on condition of paying remaining Rs.1,00,000/- by 29.04.2026, else restored.

Table of Content
1. summary of cheque dishonour proceedings and conviction. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. petitioner's partial payment submission. (Para 5)
3. conditional acquittal upon balance payment. (Para 6)

O R D E R

This Criminal Revision Case has been filed as against the Judgment passed in C.A.No.28 of 2018, dated 05.04.2021, on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Tiruvarur, thereby confirming the order of conviction and sentence imposed in STC No.55 of 2017, dated 31.05.2018, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate (FTC), Thiruthuraipoondi, Tiruvarur, for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

2. The respondent lodged a complaint against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, alleging that on 20.07.2017, the petitioner borrowed a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- from the respondent. In order to repay the said amount, the petitioner issued a cheque and the same was presented for collection. However, the said cheque was returned dishonoured with an endorsement “Funds Insufficient”. After causing a statutory notice, the respondent lodged a complaint and the same has been taken cognizance by the Trial Court.

3. In order to prove the case, the complainant had examined P.W.1 and marked Exs.P1 to P5. On the side of the petitioner, no witnesses were examined and no documents were marked.

4. On perusal of the oral and documentary evidence, the Trial Court found the petitioner guilty of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced him to undergo six months simple imprisonment and also directed him to pay the cheque amount as compensation to the respondent. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal and the same was also dismissed and confirmed the order of conviction and sentence imposed by the Trial Court. Hence, the present revision case has been filed.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that out of the total cheque amount of Rs.2,00,000/-, the petitioner has already paid a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- and she sought further time to settle the remaining amount.

6. In view of the above said submission, the order of conviction and sentence imposed by the Trial Court and confirmed by the Appellate Court is hereby set aside. The petitioner is acquitted on condition that the petitioner shall pay the remaining cheque amount of Rs.1,00,000/- on or before 29.04.2026, failing which, the order of conviction and sentence imposed by the Trial Court and confirmed by the Appellant Court shall stand automatically restored. Failing which, the respondent is at liberty to secure the petitioner to undergo the remaining period of sentence in accordance with law.

7. In the result, this Criminal Revision Case stands allowed.

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