Appeal Allowed in Cheque Dishonour Case: Accused Convicted, Ordered to Pay Compensation

The High Court allowed the appeal against the order of acquittal in a cheque dishonour case. The court found that the accused failed to disprove the issuance of the cheque and related documents, despite claiming coercion. Previous financial transactions between the parties supported the complainant's case. The accused's actions were deemed insufficient to prove the absence of a transaction. Consequently, the accused was convicted, ordered to pay Rs. 4 lakhs as compensation within four months, with default consequences of imprisonment and a fine. Additionally, a fine of Rs. 5,000 to the state was imposed, with default consequences of imprisonment for 15 days.

---

---

Issues involved: Appeal against order of acquittal in a cheque dishonour case.

Summary:
The appellant, the complainant, appealed against the order of acquittal passed by the trial court in a cheque dishonour case. The trial court had dismissed the complaint on the grounds that the accused had provided sufficient evidence, sent a legal notice, and issued a stop payment on the cheque obtained under coercion. The appellant argued that there was a financial transaction between the parties, and the accused had borrowed a sum of Rs. 4 lakhs, for which the cheque was issued. The trial court's acquittal was criticized for not considering the initial presumption in favor of the complainant and for technical reasons. The respondent, the accused, contended that the cheque was obtained under coercion, leading to the stop payment directive. Despite the acquittal on technical grounds, the accused maintained that there was no actual transaction between the parties.

The High Court noted the previous financial transactions between the parties and the specific claim by the accused that the cheque was obtained under coercion. The initial presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act favored the holder of the cheque, and the burden was on the accused to disprove the issuance of the cheque and related documents. The accused's actions of filing a complaint and issuing stop payment were deemed insufficient to prove the absence of a transaction. The acquittal of the complainant in a separate case filed by the accused was attributed to a delay in filing the FIR, but it did not negate the existence of a transaction between the parties. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the accused was convicted, ordered to pay Rs. 4 lakhs as compensation within four months, with default consequences of imprisonment and a fine. The accused was also directed to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000 to the state, with default consequences of imprisonment for 15 days. The records were to be sent back to the office.

---