Bank's Slip Must Have Number, Date And Amount Of Cheque To Be Evidence U/s. 146 NI Act: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court has held that to make up for evidence under Section 146 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the bank's slip should have to mention the number and date of the cheque and also the cheque amount with respect to the cheque dishonored.

The Court was considering an Appeal filed challenging the judgment of acquittal where the prosecution alleged commission of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 by the Respondent (accused in the matter).

The Bench of Justice A Badharudeen held, "Thus, Section 146 of the NI Act makes bank's slip as a prima facie evidence to presume the dishonor of the cheque. But, in order to apply Section 146 of the NI Act, the bank's slip should have to mention the number and date of the cheque and also the cheque amount with respect to the cheque dishonored, to enter into a finding that the cheque alleged to be dishonored was dishonored on a reading of the banker’s slip."

The Appellant was represented by Advocate P.B. Sahasranaman, while the Respondent was represented by Senior Public Prosecutor Renjith George.

Facts of the Case

The Complainant launched prosecution against the accused alleging commission of offence punishable under Section 138 of the NI Act, when a cheque for an amount of Rs.1,46,000/- drawn on Syndicate Bank issued by the accused in favour of the complainant, for a legally enforceable debt, was dishonored for want of funds. After framing charges for the offence under Section 138 of the NI Act, the trial court recorded evidence and tried the matter and acquitted the accused mainly on the finding that neither the intimation memo nor the dishonour memo contained the number of the cheque dishonoured.

Counsel for the Appellant argued that initially the name of the Bank Manager was cited as a witness for the Complainant, but he was not examined. It was contended that the Trial Court denied a fair opportunity to the complainant to adduce evidence.

Reasoning By Court 

The Court at the outset noted that as per Section 146 of the NI Act, it has been provided that, the Court shall, in respect of every proceeding under this Chapter, on production of Bank's slip or memo having thereon the official mark denoting that the cheque has been dishonoured, presume the fact of dishonour of such cheque, unless and until such fact is disproved.

It stressed that to make up for evidence under Section 146 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the bank's slip should have to mention the number and date of the cheque and also the cheque amount with respect to the cheque dishonoured.

"In this matter, Exts.P2 and P3 do not contain the number of the cheque. Therefore, the trial court ought to have granted an opportunity to the complainant to examine the Bank Manager with the relevant document to prove this aspect. Thus, I find merit in the argument raised by the learned counsel for the complainant, that the trial court denied a fair opportunity to the complainant to adduce evidence," the Court observed.

The Appeal was accordingly allowed.

Cause Title: Abdul Rahim vs. Suku S

Appearances:

Appellant- Advocate P.B. Sahasranaman, Advocate T.S. Harikumar, Advocate K. Jagadeesh

Respondent- Senior Public Prosecutor Renjith George

Click here to read/ download Order