Gurpreet Singh v. Kapil Trade Expo Pvt Ltd - (High Court of Himachal Pradesh) (11 Jun 2018)

ONCE THE ESSENTIAL ELEMENT OF CONSENSUS AD IDEM IS ESTABLISHED THEN THE FINDINGS OF THE LOWER COURT CONVICTING THE ACCUSED FOR DISHONOUR OF CHEQUE ARE LIABLE TO BE SET ASIDE

MANU/HP/0735/2018

Banking

In the instant case the criminal revision petition, is directed, against, the concurrently recorded findings, whereby, both the Courts below, convicted besides sentencing the Accused, for his committing an offence punishable under Section 138, of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1885/Act.

On an appraisal of the evidence on record, the trial Court, returned findings, of, conviction upon the Accused herein, for his committing, an, offence punishable under Sections 138 of the Act. In an appeal preferred therefrom, by the Accused before, the Sessions Judge concerned, the latter, affirmed the apposite findings of conviction, and, sentence recorded in the judgment, pronounced, by the trial Court.

This Court with the able assistance of the counsels on either side, has, with studied care and incision, evaluated the entire evidence on record. It is now to be determined, whether evidence, in display of the essential element, of, consensus ad idem or the bonafides, of the Petitioner, to liquidate the sum, comprised, in the dishonoured negotiable instrument, hence surging forth or rather contrary therewith, hence, evidence, surging forth. The apposite bonafide, and, consensus ad idem, hence, ingraining, the aforesaid redemption(s), is, reiteratedly espoused, to, erupt, from, the conduct of the Petitioner, in his after the affirmative decree, being rendered, by the Civil Court, upon, the Plaintiff's suit, for realization of sums, of, money borrowed, from it, his thereafter ensuring its satisfaction, besides from his depositing, the entire compensation amount, as, assessed, upon him. However, no conclusion, can be drawn, qua in the Petitioner, after, rendition of an affirmative decree, by the civil court, vis-a - vis, the Plaintiff's suit, instituted against him, for recovery(ies), of the amount borne, in the dishonoured negotiable instruments, and his, thereafter ensuring satisfactory realization thereof, from his assets, his rather hence evincing bonafides, and, his apt consensus ad idem, with, the Respondent/complainant. Hence, this Court, quashes proceedings and set aside, the concurrent findings of both the Courts below.

Tags : NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT CONSENSUS