Case Summary
The complainant, Sheeja Sreedharan, alleged that Athul Noby issued a cheque which was dishonoured due to insufficient funds, constituting an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. After a trial, the court found the accused not guilty.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Criminal Case
Final Judgment
No
The court acquitted both accused of the charges against them under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
Key Reasoning:
The complainant failed to prove that the accused had executed and issued the cheque for a legally enforceable debt.
The complainant failed to prove that the accused had executed and issued the cheque for a legally enforceable debt.
Why Defendant Won:
The complainant failed to prove that the accused had executed and issued the cheque for a legally enforceable debt.
The complainant failed to prove that the accused had executed and issued the cheque for a legally enforceable debt.
Supporting Evidence
The complainant's failure to produce necessary documentation regarding the transaction significantly weakened her case.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, A1 and A2 are found not guilty of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. They are acquitted u/s 255(1) of the Cr.P.C in respect of the said offence.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Sheeja Sreedharan
- Party Age
- 45
- Relation
- W/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Athul Noby
- Party Age
- 26
- Relation
- S/o
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Nirappel Distributors
- Relation
- Represented by
Plaintiffs Documents
Cheque No.011612, cheque return memo, legal notice, postal receipt
Defendants Documents
Copy of Settlement entered between the complainant and the accused before Erattupetta Police Station
Advocates
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Advocate Name
- C S Bissimon
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- Jaison Joseph
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Cheque
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Cheque issued by the accused in connection with the repayment of the loan amount.
Reference:
Ext.P1
Document Type:
Cheque Return Memo
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Document showing the dishonor of the cheque due to insufficient funds.
Reference:
Ext.P2
Document Type:
Legal Notice
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Legal notice sent to the accused demanding repayment of the cheque amount.
Reference:
Ext.P3
Document Type:
Postal receipt
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Receipt of the postal dispatch of the legal notice.
Reference:
Ext.P4
Document Type:
Returned Postal Cover with AD Card
Submitted By:
Plaintiff
Relevance:
Proof of delivery of the legal notice to the accused.
Reference:
Ext.P5
Document Type:
Settlement Document
Submitted By:
Defendant
Relevance:
Document related to a settlement entered between the complainant and the accused.
Reference:
Ext.X1
Case Classification
Case Type
Criminal Case
Category
Cheque Bounce Cases
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Pala
Common Reasons
Cheque dishonour
Case Code
Case between Sheeja Sreedharan vs Athul Noby regarding dishonoured cheque
Case Code Year
Case between Sheeja Sreedharan vs Athul Noby regarding dishonoured cheque
Case Flags
Cheque-Related Case
Nature of Cheque Case
Cheque dishonour under Section 138 N.I. Act