Natural justice in cheque dishonour cases justified remand after the accused was not given a fair chance to cross-examine and defend.

In cheque dishonour proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the Karnataka High Court treated the accused's inability to complete cross-examination and adduce defence evidence as a natural justice concern. Although an opportunity had been granted, the Court held that the matter should not conclude without a reasonable chance to use it, and it set aside the conviction and appellate affirmance. The cases were remanded to the trial court for fresh consideration, subject to conditions including deposit of part of the fine amount and fixed appearances for further trial.

---

---

Issues: Whether the conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, and the dismissal of the appeals required interference on the ground that the accused had not been given a fair opportunity to cross-examine the complainant and adduce defence evidence, warranting remand to the trial court.

Analysis: The revision petitions arose from concurrent findings of guilt in cheque dishonour cases. The grievance was not confined to the merits of the debt or the cheques, but focused on the inability of the accused to complete cross-examination and lead defence evidence. The Court treated the matter through the lens of natural justice and held that while opportunity had been granted, the proceedings should not be allowed to conclude without a reasonable chance to utilise that opportunity. To balance fairness with finality, the Court considered remand appropriate, but only on terms, including deposit of part of the fine amount and fixed appearances for further trial.

Conclusion: The conviction and appellate affirmance were set aside and the matters were remanded to the trial court for fresh consideration, subject to conditions imposed on the accused and the parties.

---