Bounced cheques: Court fines are double the dues

  • | Wednesday | 12th December, 2018

The court issued a warrant against him for his absence during the trial and on assurance that he would attend proceedings, the court decided to hear him. He issued a cheque to Momin, but it was not honoured due to insufficient funds in his bank account. After his legal notice went unanswered, Momin sued Shaikh in the metropolitan court under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.Shaikh was irregular in attending court proceedings. In 2015, he obtained a loan of Rs 3 lakh from his neighbour, Thakur Meghraj Jaukhani, who now lives in Spain . The cheque he had drawn was of Rs 7.35 lakh.

AHMEDABAD: A dishonoured cheque can cost one dear. A local court ordered defaulters to pay fines equal to double the amount due after their cheques were dishonoured due to insufficient funds in their bank accounts.An additional metropolitan magistrate, A B Bhatt, imposed fines of Rs 14.7 lakh on a Jamalpur-resident, Shafi Shaikh, after a cheque issued towards repayment of a loan from his friend bounced. The cheque he had drawn was of Rs 7.35 lakh. The penalty was in addition to the one-year jail term the court awarded to Shaikh.In June 2015, Shaikh had borrowed Rs 7.35 lakh from his friend, Mohammed Ali Momin , for his business, with the promise to repay it in six months. He issued a cheque to Momin, but it was not honoured due to insufficient funds in his bank account. After his legal notice went unanswered, Momin sued Shaikh in the metropolitan court under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.Shaikh was irregular in attending court proceedings. His advocate did not complete the cross-examination of witnesses. His irregularity led the court to close his right to cross-question witnesses. The court issued a warrant against him for his absence during the trial and on assurance that he would attend proceedings, the court decided to hear him. However, he did not even remain present to give a further statement under section 313 of the CrPC.If this was not enough, Shaikh did not remain present when the court convicted him and punished him with one-year imprisonment.Sardarnagar-resident Mukesh Makhija’s case is no different. In 2015, he obtained a loan of Rs 3 lakh from his neighbour, Thakur Meghraj Jaukhani, who now lives in Spain . All five cheques issue to repay the loan bounced. When the NRI sued Makhija, the accused was irregular in attending trial; did not bother to cross-question witnesses; missed giving his own statement; and finally had an order pronounced in his absence. During the trial, Makhija and Jaukhani reached a compromise, but the latter did not honour his word.Looking at Makhija’s conduct, the court fined him Rs 6 lakh besides sentencing him to one year in jail.

If You Like This Story, Support NYOOOZ

NYOOOZ SUPPORTER

NYOOOZ FRIEND

Your support to NYOOOZ will help us to continue create and publish news for and from smaller cities, which also need equal voice as much as citizens living in bigger cities have through mainstream media organizations.


Stay updated with all the Ahmedabad Latest News headlines here. For more exclusive & live news updates from all around India, stay connected with NYOOOZ.

Related Articles