Rajiv Kumar Juneja vs State Nct Of Delhi & Anr

Headnote AI-drafted · Reviewed and approved

The petitioner sought leave to appeal against a judgment of acquittal dated 14.12.2023 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, NI Act, East, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi in a complaint case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The complainant/petitioner alleged that the accused/respondent No.2 had purchased readymade garments worth Rs.16,53,711/- on credit and in discharge of that liability issued a cheque which was dishonoured with the remark 'funds insufficient'. The learned MM had acquitted the accused on the ground that he had successfully rebutted the presumption under Section 139 read with Section 118 of the NI Act by raising doubts about the existence of a legally enforceable debt.

The Delhi High Court restated the legal position on offences under Section 138 NI Act, noting the three conditions under the proviso to Section 138 that must be satisfied, drawing upon the Supreme Court decisions in MSR Leathers v. S. Palaniappan & Anr., Charanjit Pal Jindal v. L.N. Metalics, and N. Harihara Krishnan v. J. Thomas. The Court noted that while the accused had admitted his signature on the cheque, triggering the statutory presumption, the learned MM had undertaken a detailed analysis of inconsistencies in the petitioner's evidence, including contradictions regarding the period and nature of business transactions, non-exhibition of invoices, and absence of documentary proof of delivery of goods.

The Court examined the impugned judgment in the context of whether leave to appeal against acquittal should be granted, applying the well-settled principle that interference with an acquittal is warranted only where the trial court's findings are perverse or based on a misreading of evidence. The order records the Court's consideration of the material placed on record and the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner.

Catchwords: Negotiable Instruments Act · cheque dishonour · acquittal · leave to appeal · presumption under Section 139 · rebuttal of presumption · Section 118 · legally enforceable debt · inconsistencies in evidence · invoices not exhibited · funds insufficient · Section 138 NI Act conditions

Cheque dishonour (Section 138 NI Act)