The Supreme Court while reviving Criminal Proceedings under Section 138, NI Act, 1881, held that return of cheque by the bank with endorsement to the effect “Account Frozen” will presuppose that an account existed
.
The three-Judge Bench comprising of CJI NV Ramana, Justice A.S. Bopanna and Justice Hima Kohli was surprised that on the one hand, the bank managers have specifically deposed that no such bank account was opened and maintained in their bank while on the other hand the cheque drawn by the respondent in favour of the appellant, was returned with the remark "account frozen" in respect of the same cheque.
The SLP was filed against the Rajasthan High Court order whereby it allowed the writ petition preferred by the respondent and quashed and set aside the criminal proceedings.
The Court noted that the matter require full-fledged trial and was in no way a case where the proceedings could have quashed.
The impugned High Court order was thus set aside and matter was remitted back to Trial Court.
Social media is bold.
Social media is young.
Social media raises questions.
Social media is not satisfied with an answer.
Social media looks at the big picture.
Social media is interested in every detail.
social media is curious.
Social media is free.
Social media is irreplaceable.
But never irrelevant.
Social media is you.
(With input from news agency language)
If you like this story, share it with a friend!
We are a non-profit organization. Help us financially to keep our journalism free from government and corporate pressure
0 Comments