Joint Trial For Dishonour Of Multiple Cheques Permissible When Cheques Issued Form Part Of Same Transaction: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court, in a recent decision, has clarified that joint trial of dishonour of multiple cheques is permissible when the cheques in question were issued as part of same transaction.Justice Johnson John was considering a criminal revision petition filed by the accused in a cheque bounce case challenging the concurrent findings of guilt passed by the trial court and the...
The Kerala High Court, in a recent decision, has clarified that joint trial of dishonour of multiple cheques is permissible when the cheques in question were issued as part of same transaction.
Justice Johnson John was considering a criminal revision petition filed by the accused in a cheque bounce case challenging the concurrent findings of guilt passed by the trial court and the appellate court.
The revision petitioner contended that the trial is vitiated for violation of Section 219 Cr.P.C. since the trial court conducted joint trial of the dishonour of 5 cheques. It was argued that each cheque's dishonour was a separate cause of action and there was not enough evidence to show that the cheques were issued in connection with the same transaction.
The complainant company pointed out that the complaint states that the revision petitioner purchased steel items on various occasions, part payments were made on different occasions and five cheques were issued towards the balance due on 5 occasions. This was not challenged while cross examining the complainant's Managing Director.
After hearing the parties and perusing the documents, the Court took note of the fact that the complainant's chief affidavit also reiterates the averment regarding issuance of five cheques by the revision petitioner in discharge of balance due on purchase made on different occasions and that the cross examination does not show that the same was not challenged.
The Court further observed that the cheques were issued with a time period of less than 4 months and since re-appreciation of evidence is not possible at revision stage, there is no reason to disagree with the findings of the trial court and the appellate court.
“In the chief affidavit of…Managing partner, the averments in…the complaint are reiterated and a perusal of the cross examination would show that no specific challenge is raised regarding the averment that the accused purchased steel items on various occasions and issued 5 cheques towards the balance due. It is pertinent to note that the cheques in question were issued during the period from 24.12.2009 to 06.03.2010 and therefore, considering the facts and circumstances, I find that the trial court and the appellate court are justified in arriving at a conclusion that the cheques form part of the same transaction and that in view of Section 220 Cr.P.C., cheques issued as part of the same transaction can be jointly tried… The revisional court cannot re-appreciate the evidence, unless there are glaring indications of a grave injustice or a blatant violation of the law,” the Court opined.
Finding that there was no illegality, perversity or infirmity in the judgments challenges, the Court felt it fit to dismiss the revision petition.
Case No: Crl.R.P. No. 776/2020
Case Title: Vijayan P. v. George and Company and Anr.
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Ker) 257
Counsel for the petitioner: M. Shaju Purushothaman, K.S. Rajesh
Counsel for the respondents: K.B. Gangesh, Maya M.N. - Public Prosecutor