9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (11) TMI 934X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t has been correctly held that this is a question of fact. This is a fact which will have to be established on evidence during trial. At this stage, the High Court could not have quashed the complaint merely on the basis of an assertion in the reply. - CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 1110-1111 OF 2001 SLP (CRL.) NOS. 2347-48 OF 2001 - - - Dated:- 2-11-2001 - K.T. THOMAS AND S.N. VARIAVA, JJ. R. Sudhinder and Rajesh Kumar for the Appellant. K. Shivraj Choudhary and Dr. R. Prakash for the Respondent. JUDGMENT Variava, J. - Leave granted. Heard parties. 2. These appeals are against the judgment of the Single Judge of the Madras High Court by which the criminal proceedings launched by the appellant under section 138 of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his appeal. 6. In the impugned judgment, it has been held that the defence that the alteration in the date was not made voluntarily was a question of fact which would not constitute a ground for quashing the complaint. However, after so holding correctly, the Court goes on to state that the validity period of a cheque is only 6 months. It was held that the validity period of all the 8 cheques had already expired by October, 1995, and then held that once the validity period was over, the cheques could not be re-validated by altering the dates so as to give fresh life to the cheques for another 6 months. It is held that in law, a cheque which has become invalid because of the expiry of the stipulated period could not be made valid by alte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the drawer thereof, such alteration also cannot be used as a ground to resist the right of the payee or the holder thereof. It is always a question of fact whether the alteration was made by the drawer himself, or whether it was made with the consent of the drawer. It requires evidence to prove the aforesaid question whenever it is disputed. 9. It is held by the High Court that a change of date is a material alteration which affected the interests of the respondent. It is held that the respondent, not being a willing party to the said alteration, the cheques were void as contemplated by section 87. At this stage, there is no basis for arriving at such a conclusion. In the earlier part of the impugned judgment, it has been correctly hel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
