Srinagar, May 6: A local court here sentenced a man to imprisonment of one year and asked him to pay a compensation of over Rs 32 lakh in a cheque bounce case.
Judge Small Causes Court Srinagar, Fayaz Ahmad Qureshi, sentenced one SikanderKhursheed to undergo an imprisonment of one year and directed him to pay a compensation of Rs 32,24,000 to a woman compliant in the cheque bounce case.
While awarding the sentence to the accused, the court observed that the object of bringing Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act or statute is to inculcate faith in the efficacy of banking operations and credibility in transacting business on negotiable instruments.
This provision, the court said, was incorporated to enforce strict liability so far as negotiable instrument is concerned.
“The law relating to negotiable instruments is the law of commercial world legislated to facilitate the activities in trade and commerce making provision of giving sanctity to the instruments of credit which could be deemed to be convertible into money and easily passable from one person to another,” it said.
The two parties before the court had entered into an agreement regarding the sale of a flat at SatbariChattarpur South Delhi.
A woman from Bagh-e-Mehtab Srinagar, who was compliant, had executed the agreement on 18 April 2018 with the accused who happened to be the Managing Director(MD) of a Cooperation dealing in the sale and purchase of the property.
On failure of the MD to hand over the possession he was required to return the whole amount with an interest of 8 percent.
Eventually, the accused did not deliver possession of the flat and issued cheques to the complainant.
The court observed that the “accused issued cheques probably considering that he is executing certain pieces of papers to cause delay and not negotiable instruments which are to pass from hands to hands like goods”.
“The accused not only defeated the object of N.I.Act but also cheated the complainant by issuing cheques giving her assurance that these cheques will be encashed in due course and the complainant will get her dues”.
The court observed it “unfortunate” that the two cheques issued by the accused turned out to be only pieces of paper which could not get the complainant her own money assured by the accused to be paid by virtue of the cheques."
“This has not only shaken the trust of the complainant in dealings through negotiable instruments but is also stalled money from free circulation and it has deprived the complainant of her own money.”
The court ordered that the accused shall pay a compensation of Rs 32,24,000 less by Rs 4 lakh which he has already paid within a period of one month failing which the same shall be recovered in accordance with Section 421 CrPC 1973.
The court sentenced the accused to simple imprisonment for one year out of which he shall undergo six months rigorous imprisonment and six months simple imprisonment.