9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Challenge to acquittal under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act; Premature presentation of case; Taking cognizance by the Court. Analysis: 1. The appeal challenged the acquittal of the accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The complainant alleged that a loan was advanced to the accused, who issued a cheque that bounced due to insufficient funds. The accused claimed the cheque was security for a failed land transaction. The trial judge deemed the matter civil and premature, as a civil suit was pending, but did not accept the accused's defense. 2. The Court highlighted the purpose of Section 138, emphasizing the need to penalize dishonored cheques. It clarified that prosecution under this section does not bar civil recovery. The trial judge erred in suggesting the matter be resolved in a civil court due to the initial land deal, as both criminal and civil actions can proceed independently. 3. Regarding the premature presentation of the case, the Court explained that taking cognizance is crucial, not merely presenting the complaint. Cognizance signifies the Court's application of mind to the offense, not the offender's presence. In this case, cognizance was taken on 5-4-97, not on the earlier date, as evidenced by the court records. 4. The Court cited legal precedents emphasizing that cognizance must be taken after presenting the case, and failure to do so renders the complaint premature. The Court directed a fresh disposal of the case on its merits, allowing both parties to present further evidence, with a mandate for the trial court to decide within six months.
|
