Back
Mumbai Court Sentences Pala MLA Mani C Kappen to 3.5 Years in Cheque Bounce Cases
Conviction Under Triggers Immediate Disqualification Under RPA
The , has convicted Pala MLA Mani C. Kappen in four separate cheque bounce cases, sentencing him to a total of three and a half years of and ordering him to pay over ₹5.3 crore in compensation. The judgment, delivered by Magistrate Shri S. A. Khalane on , also triggered the immediate disqualification of the Kerala legislator under .
The Loan That Led to a Legal Battle
The dispute originated from a friendly loan of ₹2 crore that businessman Dinesh Menon, Chairman and Managing Director of and , extended to Kappen in . Kappen, a businessman and politician, promised to repay by but failed. He paid only ₹25 lakh on .
A settlement was reached on , under which Kappen agreed to pay a total of ₹3.25 crore—including the ₹25 lakh already paid—in two installments. To secure the debt, he issued four cheques drawn on ’s Palai branch: ₹1 crore each dated March 31 and , ₹50 lakh dated , and ₹75 lakh dated . The agreement was extended multiple times, finally until .
All four cheques were dishonoured—three for insufficient funds and one for signature mismatch. Menon presented the cheques for encashment at and , but each was returned unpaid. After issuing , Menon filed four separate complaints under .
Defence Rejected: Cheques Were Not Mere Security
Kappen’s defence centered on the claim that the cheques were issued only as security and that there was no because the agreement was unregistered and the complainant lacked a money lending license. He also argued that the cheques were presented before the extended validity of the agreement ended on .
The court, however, rejected these arguments, noting that Kappen had signed a on April 19, 2012, unequivocally admitting receipt of ₹2 crore and agreeing to pay ₹3.25 crore. “Once the accused agreed to pay the amount and receipt of the amount by the execution of M.O.U., he is estopped by virtue of the ,” the judge observed.
Presumption of Liability Stands Unrebutted
The court relied on the under , which presumes that a cheque was issued for a unless the accused proves otherwise. Citing the ’s decisions in and , the judge held that Kappen failed to raise a .
“The accused has not taken a and has not adduced evidence to that effect,” the court noted. “In order to rebut the presumption under , accused has miserably failed.”
The court also highlighted Kappen’s failure to reply to the statutory notice, drawing an under the recent ruling in Kuntegowda v. Thurubaiah (2026), which states that non-response to a demand notice “gives rise to an inference that the complainant’s version carries merit.”
Sentence and Compensation
The court imposed the following sentences:
- For the ₹75 lakh cheque (C.C. No. 2394/SS/2019): 1 year SI and compensation of ₹1.20 crore with 9% interest, default 3 months.
- For the ₹1 crore cheque dated (C.C. No. 2080/SS/2016): 1 year SI and compensation of ₹1.70 crore with 9% interest, default 6 months.
- For the ₹1 crore cheque dated (C.C. No. 2081/SS/2016): 1 year SI and compensation of ₹1.70 crore with 9% interest, default 6 months.
- For the ₹50 lakh cheque (C.C. No. 3277/SS/2015): 6 months SI and compensation of ₹70 lakh with 9% interest, default 3 months.
The judge also issued against Kappen, who remained absent during sentencing.
Disqualification Now in Effect
Following the conviction, Dinesh Menon has moved a representation before the Speaker seeking Kappen’s disqualification under , which states that a legislator convicted of any offence and sentenced to imprisonment for not less than two years is disqualified from the date of conviction. The ’s ruling in Lily Thomas v. Union of India (2013) makes this disqualification automatic and immediate, without any grace period for appeal.
An election petition challenging Kappen’s victory from Pala constituency is already pending before the . With this conviction, the Pala seat may soon be declared vacant, paving the way for a by-election.
