https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175428 The court determined the agreement between the petitioner and the complainant to be void under Section 23 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, due to its unlawful nature involving illegal gratification. Consequently, the cheque issued under this agreement could not discharge a legally enforceable debt under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The doctrine of pari delicto applied, and Section 65 of the Indian Contract Act was deemed inapplicable as the agreement was void ab initio. The petitioner's conviction was set aside, the revision petition was allowed, and the petitioner was acquitted. en-us Wed, 01 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 15 Feb 2024 12:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175428 The court determined the agreement between the petitioner and the complainant to be void under Section 23 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, due to its unlawful nature involving illegal gratification. Consequently, the cheque issued under this agreement could not discharge a legally enforceable debt under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The doctrine of pari delicto applied, and Section 65 of the Indian Contract Act was deemed inapplicable as the agreement was void ab initio. The petitioner's conviction was set aside, the revision petition was allowed, and the petitioner was acquitted. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 01 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175428