Bengaluru: In present to turn into accountable for an offence under Part 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, ie, cheque soar conditions, the accused is required to bear defend a watch on over the parable when the cheque becomes due for presentation/realisation, the Karnataka excessive court docket noticed in a original judgment.Justice M Nagaprasanna made this commentary whereas quashing the court docket cases against Ms/ ND Builders Deepest Restricted, its managing director MKK Durani, and plenty of different other directors of the company.The complainant, Ritesh Raushan, had bought a flat from the agency along with his spouse. The corporate was as soon as contractually obliged to pay Rs 41,75,634 – the hobby sing of the home loan – to the purchaser for now not handing over possession of the flat.
On this regard, a cheque for Rs 41 lakh was as soon as issued.Within the interim, a police sight was as soon as issued to the manager of Bank of Maharashtra, directing debit freezing of the accounts of the company and its MD over a cheating and misappropriation criticism. The debt freeze took place on Might perchance well 24, 2024. Thereafter, on June 6, 2024, the complainant presented the Rs 41 lakh cheque, dated March 9, 2024, for realisation.The cheque was as soon as dishonoured, with an endorsement, “account blocked situation covered in 21 25”, ie, the RBI guidelines.
Straight, the complainant initiated cheque soar court docket cases against the petitioners.Demanding the equivalent, the petitioners claimed that they were now not aware that their accounts were frozen on the time when the cheque was as soon as presented for realisation. They added that the cheque was as soon as dishonoured on myth of the endorsement issued for debit freezing, which meant that they would possibly perchance now not be hauled up in the court docket cases, as the parable was as soon as frozen and the amount would possibly perchance now not be realised by the complainant, they added.After perusing the materials on declare, Justice Nagaprasanna vital that the accounts of the petitioners were packed with life as much as 2 months after the issuance of the cheque in ask, and there was as soon as ample balance as successfully. The think identified that the petitioners were now not aware of the freezing of these accounts, as borne out by the paperwork.As per RBI guidelines, a bother covered under 21 way that the fee is stopped by an attachment present, and covered under 25 way that withdrawal is stopped in lieu of insolvency of the parable holder. Therefore, it is miles a bother where the drawer of the cheque has no defend a watch on or authority over the parable in the case of debit freezing, the think identified whereas quashing the court docket cases against the petitioners.
