₹5.25 Lakh Cheque Bounce Case: Mohali Court Acquits Haryana Woman, Calls Complaint ‘Doubtful’

A Mohali court recently acquitted a Haryana woman accused in a ₹5.25-lakh cheque bounce case, after finding the prosecution’s allegations unsubstantiated and “the complaint doubtful”.

The trial judge said the complainant failed to prove that a legally enforceable debt existed or that the accused had wilfully defaulted on payment.

The case originated during the COVID-19 period when the complainant, Mohali resident Pankaj Kumar, claimed he had lent Rachna over ₹5 lakh to secure the release of gold she allegedly pledged with a finance company.

He produced two cheques totalling ₹3.90 lakh, which were dishonoured on presentation with the bank remark “drawer’s signature differs”.

However, under cross-examination, the complainant conceded that only ₹1.19 lakh had actually been transferred to the accused’s bank account, and he could not produce any written agreement or evidence of the remaining amount.

Court noted that he repeatedly failed to substantiate claimed cash transactions, including where and in whose presence the payments were allegedly made.

The defence, led by advocate Tejwinder Singh Gill, presented bank records showing that the ₹1.19 lakh was already repaid. Defence arguments and pointed questioning exposed inconsistencies in the complainant’s testimony, leading the court to describe the prosecution’s case as “concocted, unreliable and legally unsustainable”.

On these findings, court dismissed the complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, paving the way for the accused’s acquittal.

Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 criminalises the dishonour of cheques issued towards discharge of a legally enforceable debt or liability. It comes into play when a cheque is returned unpaid due to insufficiency of funds or because it exceeds the arrangement made with the bank, provided the payee issues a statutory legal notice within 30 days of receiving information of dishonour and the drawer fails to make payment within 15 days of receipt of that notice.

The provision was introduced to enhance the credibility of commercial transactions and ensure faith in banking operations, but courts have consistently held that a complainant must strictly prove the existence of a legally recoverable debt and compliance with all procedural requirements to secure a conviction