Documentary evidence must to prove guilt in check bounce cases: Jaipur court
In the instant case, the complainant failed to prove that the disputed check was given to him by the accused for any loan or legal obligation
JAIPUR: Documentary evidence proving lending of money to the complainant is necessary in check bounce cases, the Special Court for NIACT Cases-4, Jaipur Metro-II held. In order to convict a drawee under section 138 of the NI Act, the drawer must have a document proving that he lent the money to the drawee.
In the instant case, the complainant failed to prove that the disputed check was given to him by the accused for any loan or legal obligation, therefore it would be right to acquit the accused Sunita on the benefit of the doubt.
The court gave this order on the complaint of Vasudev Khilnani. Advocate Deepak Chauhan told the court that the complainant had failed to prove under which legal obligation the accused had given him a check of Rs 25 lakh. On the other hand, the agreement mentioned is also not signed by the complainant or his firm, hence that agreement cannot be considered to have been executed. The complainant has misappropriated the check and has also not been able to prove the offense under section 138.
Therefore, the accused should be acquitted by the benefit of the doubt. The court agreed with the arguments of the accused side and acquitted him. Significantly, it was said in the complaint that the accused’s firm M/s Kaimax Power markets medicines. He had taken Rs 25 lakh as security by making the firm of the complainant a consignee agent. But when there was a dispute between the two, the accused gave him a check of Rs 25 lakh, which bounced due to insufficient funds in his bank account, so action should be taken against the accused under section 138.