Delhi High Court Declines Relief To Convict In Long-Running Cheque Bounce Dispute

In Brijesh Kumar @ Neetu v. Mukesh Garg, the Delhi High Court upheld the conviction of a man in a cheque dishonour case involving ₹5 lakh and refused to interfere with the concurrent findings of the trial court and appellate court. Justice Girish Kathpalia dismissed the criminal revision petition and imposed additional litigation costs of ₹10,000 on the petitioner for filing what the Court described as a meritless challenge.

The dispute arose from a friendly loan allegedly advanced by the complainant in March 2015. In discharge of the liability, the accused issued a cheque dated February 16, 2016, which was later dishonoured due to insufficient funds. Proceedings were subsequently initiated under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

The petitioner argued before the High Court that the complainant had failed to disclose the loan transaction in his income tax returns and also claimed that the cheque had been misused in relation to a separate property dispute. However, the Court noted that the accused had admitted his signature on the cheque as well as receipt of the statutory legal notice during his statement under Section 313 CrPC.

The High Court reiterated that revisional jurisdiction is extremely limited and cannot be used for reappreciation of evidence unless there is clear perversity or illegality. Finding no such infirmity in the judgments of the lower courts, the Court upheld the conviction and directed the accused to deposit the compensation amount within three days, failing which default sentencing proceedings would follow.