Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Absence of Cheque Number on Bank Return Memo - Several sources highlight that bank return memos and communications regarding dishonoured cheques often do not mention the cheque number. For instance, sources ["2024 0 Supreme(Guj) 756"], ["
Tulshi Steel Traders Propritor Pushpendra Kesharwani VS Purva Construction Propritor - Crimes
"], and ["2024 0 Supreme(MP) 180"] emphasize that the lack of cheque number or official bank stamp does not automatically invalidate the memo or the dishonour process. Courts have consistently held that the absence of a cheque number or bank seal does not render the memo invalid, as its primary purpose is to inform the drawer about the dishonour reasons ["Tulshi Steel Traders Propritor Pushpendra Kesharwani VS Purva Construction Propritor - Crimes
"], ["2024 0 Supreme(MP) 180"].Legal Validity of Return Memos Without Cheque Number - Courts, including the Delhi High Court (["
Tulshi Steel Traders Propritor Pushpendra Kesharwani VS Purva Construction Propritor - Crimes
"], ["2024 0 Supreme(MP) 180"]) and other judgments, have ruled that a cheque return memo, even if not bearing an official stamp or cheque number, remains valid for the purpose of initiating proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The key requirement is that the memo accurately reflects the dishonour reasons, such as funds insufficient or signature differ, rather than the presence of specific identifiers like cheque numbers.Grounds for Acquittal Due to Memo Infirmities - Several sources (["2024 0 Supreme(Guj) 756"], ["2024 0 Supreme(Chh) 472"]) demonstrate that courts have acquitted accused persons where the only defect was the absence of an official stamp or mention of cheque number in the return memo. Courts have clarified that such infirmities do not nullify the memo or the complaint, provided the dishonour reasons are clear and the other procedural requirements are met.
Main Insight - The primary reason for acquittal based on the ground No Cheque Number on Bank Return Memo is that the absence of the cheque number or bank stamp does not constitute a legal defect sufficient to dismiss a complaint under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. The courts focus on the dishonour reasons and procedural compliance rather than minor technical deficiencies in the return memo.
Analysis and Conclusion:The consistent judicial stance across multiple cases indicates that the absence of a cheque number on a bank return memo alone does not ground for acquittal. Such infirmities are considered procedural and do not affect the validity of the dishonour communication or the prosecution's case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Therefore, the ground No Cheque Number on Bank Return Memo is not a valid basis for acquittal, provided the dishonour reasons are properly recorded and other legal procedures are followed.
In the high-stakes world of cheque bounce cases under , defendants often scrutinize every detail of the . One common defense tactic is pointing to the absence of the cheque number—or even account number—on the bank's return memo. But is Account Number Not Mentioned in the Dishonored Cheque or no cheque number on the memo truly a ground for ? This blog dives into legal precedents, presumptions, and practical insights to clarify why courts generally reject this as a standalone basis for dismissal.
Note: This article provides general information based on judicial precedents and is not legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for case-specific guidance.
When a cheque bounces, the bank issues a return memo (or slip) indicating the reason for , such as insufficient funds or signature mismatch. This document is crucial for proving the fact of under . Defendants may argue that missing details—like the cheque number or account number—render the memo invalid, questioning its or reliability.
However, Indian courts have consistently held that such omissions do not automatically invalidate proceedings. The in explicitly states that the absence of a cheque number on the return memo does not invalidate the memo or the proceedings under Section 138 2023 0 Supreme(All) 1153. Similarly, the , interpreting NI Act, ruled that lack of an official stamp or signature does not render the memo invalid if issued by the bank 2023 0 Supreme(All) 1153.
creates a : if the bank's slip or memo bears the official mark indicating , the fact of is presumed unless disproved. This shifts the focus from minor formalities to substantive proof.
Courts emphasize that bank documents generally don't require certification under the if proven genuine 2023 0 Supreme(All) 1153. Internal or unsigned memos can be challenged but aren't fatal if supported elsewhere 2023 0 Supreme(Del) 5760.
The core question: Does missing cheque or account number on the return memo warrant ? Legal precedents say no, provided other details (date, bank stamp, endorsement reason) align and prove convincingly.
In Exhibit-6 cheque return memo of State Bank of India, the reason insufficiency of fund was recorded without emphasizing account details, and the plea was rejected at revision stage as not raised earlier 2020 0 Supreme(Gau) 341. The court stressed: the accused must rebut presumption via , not technicalities.
favor the holder/complainant with presumptions of consideration, debt, and . The accused need only raise a probable defence—not prove it beyond doubt—to shift the burden back 2024 0 Supreme(Guj) 1016.
Examples from case law:- Accused rebutted via signature discrepancies and missing cheques, leading to upheld (M.S. Narayana Menon principles) 2024 0 Supreme(Guj) 1016.- Failure to prove source of funds or corroborate debt doomed complainant, despite memos 2023 0 Supreme(Del) 5760.- However, where memos indicated cheque numbers and causes (e.g., Ex.P.3 with initials), non-examination of bank staff wasn't fatal 2019 0 Supreme(Mad) 3319.
In contrast, mere absence of seal or number didn't overturn conviction when jurisdiction and service were proper 2019 0 Supreme(Mad) 3319.
Bank return memos are admissible if:1. Issued by the drawee/payee bank.2. Bear reason for .3. Corroborated by cheque, slip, notice, and account statements.
Discrepancies in cheque numbers (e.g., complaint vs. memo: 512418 vs. 105137) or notice address may raise doubts but aren't substantial alone 2012 0 Supreme(Bom) 1819.
Courts uphold memos if other details support their authenticity and the fact of 2023 0 Supreme(All) 1153.
The absence of cheque or account number on a is generally not a valid ground for under . Precedents like Guneet Bhasin and rulings under affirm that memos need not be perfect—focus remains on proving via collective evidence 2023 0 Supreme(All) 11532022 0 Supreme(Del) 818.
Key Takeaways:- Presumptions favor complainants; accused must rebut probabilistically.- Minor omissions don't nullify if substantive proof exists.- Success hinges on holistic evidence, not isolated flaws.
Stay informed on NI Act developments to navigate cheque disputes effectively. For tailored advice, reach out to a legal expert.
#Section138, #ChequeBounce, #NIACT
memo in which the date is altered and in Exh.22 communication addressed by Dena Bank, no cheque number is mentioned. ... In the communication which is produced below Exh.22, no cheque number is mentioned from the above evidence, it can be concluded that the alteration is made in the return memo issued by the Gujarat Industrial Co- operative B....
If the cheque return memo is not bearing any official stamp of the bank, it does not render the cheque return memo as invalid or illegal. ... The details of the case number of the trial Court, cheque number, amount, date of dishonor, date of returning memo, and date of issuance of notice to the accu....
High Court of Delhi has opined that if the cheque return memo is not bearing any official stamp of the bank, it does not render the cheque return memo as invalid or illegal. ... Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that learned trial Court has passed the judgment of acquittal only on the fact that the the cheque retur....
The disputed cheque was account payee cheque. On being seen Exhibit 18, he admit that the cheque is bearer cheque. (4) In the return memo reasons mentioned are signature differ, stop payment, fund insufficient and rubber stamp required. ... The said cheque was dated 01.05.2013 was deposited with the Bank on 12.07.2013 which was returned on 13.07.2013 ....
Even the Appellant/complainant relied upon the documents i.e. the two cheques (exhibit P/1 and P/2), the cheque deposition slips (exhibit P/3 and P/4), and also the cheque return memo issued by the Bank and the legal demand notice issued to Respondent No.1/accused on 08.08.2007, and in all these documents ... in all other places of the complaint memo, the number of cheq....
Number of documents were relied upon by the prosecution which included Ext.1, Cheque; Ext.2 and Ext.2/1, the deposit receipt of UBI, Titagarh Branch dated 12.12.08 and return memo dated 15.12.08; Ext.3 and Ext.3/1, bank deposit slip dated 01.01.09 and return memo dated 02.01.09; Ext.4 and Ext.4/1, bank ... deposit slip dated 17.03.09 and retu....
The complainant before the trial Court examined himself as PW1 and filed the promissory note executed by the accused and the cheque given by the accused as Ex.P1 & Ex.P2 and along with the cheque return memo, legal notice, postal acknowledgment Card, statement of Accounts of complainant’s bank account ... The trial Court rightly acquitted the accused/respondent on the ground of the offen....
Cheques no. 680665 and 680668 were returned dishonored vide return memos dated 08.05.2009, cheque no. 680667 was returned dishonored vide return memo dated 04.04.2009 and cheque no. 680666 was returned dishonored vide return memo dated 28.02.2009, due to 'insufficient funds'. ... I have a bank account but I do not remember the number ....
To infer that the cheque was issued without sufficient fund, it is always looked at the memo of the bank which will disclose the reason for return. The cheque may be returned for reasons like mutilation, signature difference, insufficient fund, exceeds arrangement, stop payment, alternation etc. ... Ex.P-1 is a return cheque of the bank which shows tha....
Ex.C1 is cheque No.002436 dated 25.03.2016 favouring the complainant for an amount of Rs.2,31,000/- issued by the accused and drawn on Corporation Bank, Nabha Branch, Nabha. Ex.C2 is the return memo dated 12.05.2016 issued by the Bank revealing that cheque was dishonoured for "insufficient funds". ... Complainant presented the cheque with his banker i.e., Punjab Nationa....
The respondent No.2 had an opportunity to prove the said documents through his own examination as well examination of the Bank officers. But it appears that he has not proved those documents when witnesses were examined in the Court. 86 respondent No.2 sought permission of Court for his re-examination to prove cheque, Bank receipt, cheque return memo and Bank memorandum.
633990 dated 30.04.2004 9 (Exhibit-1) drawn for an amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- was dishonoured on the ground of insufficiency of fund in the account of the accused. Exhibit-6 is the cheque return memo of the State Bank of India, Panbazar Branch, Guwahati, exhibited by P.W.2, wherein the reason for dishonour was recorded as insufficiency of fund. Exhibit-3 is the cheque return memo issued by UCO Bank on 16.10.2004 and it indicated that the cheque no.
Further, the learned counsel for the appellant would submit that since the cheque was presented in the same bank, where the complainant had account, the question of affixing seal on the instrument, did not arise. The bank Official has also affixed the initial in the memo. While so, non-examination of staff, from the bank is not fatal to the case of the complainant. The Bank Memo which is marked as Ex.P.3, indicates the cheque number and cause for return.
6. A perusal of the impugned judgment and order of acquittal reveals that the learned trial judge has essentially acquitted respondent No. 2 on the ground that cheque number mentioned in the notice under section 138(b) of the NI Act and the complaint and the cheque number which is mentioned on the cheque as well as exhibit 10, cheque return memo issued by the bank are different and therefore respondent No. 2 cannot be convicted for the offence punishable under section 138 of the Nego....
5. Learned Magistrate recorded the order of acquittal primarily on the following two grounds: (i) The complainant had stated that cheque bearing no.512418 was issued but the same was actually bearing no.105137 which number was also found on the cheque return memo. The notice issued by the complainant under Section 138 of the Act to the accused, was not on the correct address.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
