Security cheques and absence of legally enforceable debt justified affirmation of acquittal in cheque dishonour case

A conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was not sustainable where the cheques were found to have been issued only as security and no legally enforceable liability was proved. The complaint lacked basic particulars of the transaction, including the approach, valuation and delivery of the alleged gold ornaments, while the complainant's evidence shifted on material facts. The receipt relied on was disputed, showed alterations, and described the cheques as security. Defence evidence supported the respondent's version, and the record did not establish an outstanding debt when the cheques were issued. The acquittal was therefore affirmed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was sustainable when the cheques were found to have been issued as security and no outstanding legally enforceable liability was established.

Analysis: The complaint did not disclose essential particulars of the alleged transaction, including the date of approach, the details and valuation of the gold ornaments, and the date of their delivery. In evidence, the complainant's version shifted on material aspects, including the existence and value of pledged ornaments and the alleged payment made in lieu thereof. The receipt relied upon by the complainant was disputed on the question of execution, contained alterations, and recorded the cheques as security. The defence evidence supported the respondent's version, and no credible material established that any enforceable liability existed when the cheques were issued.

Conclusion: The finding that the cheques were issued towards a legally enforceable debt was not proved, and the acquittal was warranted.

Final Conclusion: The appellate challenge to the setting aside of conviction and sentence failed, and the respondent's acquittal stood affirmed.

---