Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

9. I have heard Mr. N.S. Chandel, Senior Counsel instructed by Mr. Vinod Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner/accused and Mr. Bhupinder Singh, learned counsel for the respondent/complainant.

10. Mr. N.S. Chandel learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner/accused submitted that the cheque was dishonoured with an endorsement instrument outdated /stale. It was not presented before the bank within three months from the date of its issuance. The dishonour of an outdated/stale cheque does not give rise to a liability under Section 138 of the N.I Act. Therefore, he prayed that the present petition be allowed and the judgments and order passed by the learned Courts below be set aside.

15. The present revision has to be decided as per the parameters laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

16. It is undisputed that the cheque was dishonoured with an endorsement instrument outdated/stale. This endorsement is dated 23.01.2018. It was submitted on behalf of the complainant that the cheque was presented before the State Bank of India on 17.01.2018. Reliance was placed on pay-in-slip 2024:HHC:9988 (Ext.CW-1/C). The complainant also asserted in para 5 of the complaint that he presented the cheque to the State Bank of India Jhiknipul Branch on 17.01.2018. It was submitted that the presentation before the bank of the complainant within limitation is sufficient compliance. This submission is not acceptable. Hon'ble Supreme Court held in Shri Ishar Alloy Steels Ltd. v. Jayaswals Neco Ltd., (2001) 3 SCC 609 : 2001 SCC (Cri) 582 :

17. Thus the presentation of the cheque before the bank the complainant will not assist him 2024:HHC:9988

18. The cheque was dishonoured by the bank of the accused on 23.01.2018. The cheque was issued on 21.10.2017 and was to be presented before the drawee bank within three months excluding the date of drawing of the cheque. The cheque was to be presented before the drawee bank on or before 21.01.2018 but it was presented on 23.01.2018 after the lapse of the statutory period of validity of the cheque. Thus, it was rightly dishonoured with an endorsement outdated/state cheque.

20. The cheque was dishonoured with an endorsement 'Instrument outdated/stale'. It was laid down by Madras High Court in M. Meeran Mohideen vs. B. Vijayakumar 2019 (4) Civil 2024:HHC:9988 Court Cases 642 that when the cheque was returned with the reason 'Instrument outdated/stale", the cheque became invalid and the proceedings were vititated. It was observed:

"7. In view of the same, the instrument viz., the Cheque is valid only for a period of 6 months from the date of issuance of the same. In the case on hand, admittedly, the cheque was presented only after the period of 6 months viz., 26.09.2017. Therefore, the cheque dated 10.03.2017 became invalid and hence, the entire proceedings have been vitiated and the learned Judicial Magistrate without even considering the said fact, mechanically took cognizance and issued a summons to the petitioner. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument is liable to be quashed."