Srinagar Court acquits 3 in Rs 17 lakh cheque bounce cases

By RK News
Comments 0
12 Apr 2026

Srinagar, Apr 11: In a significant set of rulings pronounced in open court on Saturday, the Court of Sub-Judge, Srinagar, acquitted three different accused in three separate complaints filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, involving dishonoured cheques cumulatively amounting to approximately Rs 17 lakh.

The orders were pronounced in open court in the presence of all three accused hailing respectively from Anantnag, Bijbehara and Bandipora as well as the complainant who is from Srinagar and is the common complainant in all three matters and had filed the complaints against three separate business concerns.

The three matters, decided by a common thread of reasoning, were: Complaint Case No. 81/2025; Complaint Case No. 1126/2024; and Complaint Case No. 1125/2024, titled In the Court of Sub-Judge, Srinagar at Srinagar.

In all three cases, the Court held that the complainant had failed to discharge the foundational burden of proving the existence of a legally enforceable debt or liability, a mandatory ingredient for conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

The Court reiterated that the statutory presumption under Section 139 of the Act is rebuttable, and that the mere production of a dishonoured cheque, coupled with a statutory demand notice, is not by itself sufficient to sustain a conviction where the foundational facts of the underlying transaction remain unproved.

Relying on settled law, including the decisions of the Supreme Court, the Court observed that once the accused raises a probable defence which creates doubt about the existence of a legally recoverable debt, the onus shifts back to the complainant to prove the debt by cogent and reliable evidence.

In each of the three complaints, the complainant was found to have failed to produce credible documentary or oral evidence establishing the source of funds, the precise terms of the alleged transaction, or the circumstances under which the cheques in question came to be issued.

The accused in all three matters were represented by Advocate Viqas Malik, Partner, IMR Law Offices (Iqbal, Malik & Romaan), Srinagar, as lead counsel, assisted by Advocate Mushtaq Dar.

The defence successfully argued that the complainant had failed to establish the foundational facts, and that material contradictions in the complainant's evidence rendered the prosecution case unsustainable in law.

Commenting on the rulings, Advocate Viqas Malik said: “These three acquittals, pronounced on a single day, reaffirm a well-settled but often overlooked principle that Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is not a tool for recovery in the absence of a proven, legally enforceable debt. The presumption under Section 139 is a rule of evidence, not a substitute for proof. Where the foundational transaction itself is not established, the prosecution must fail, regardless of the fact of dishonour.”

Advocate Mushtaq Ahmad, Associate, IMR Law Offices, added: “In each of these three complaints, we demonstrated on the record that the complainant's version could not withstand scrutiny. The Court's approach is consistent with the recent trend in both the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Hon'ble High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh, which has repeatedly cautioned that Section 138 proceedings cannot be reduced to a mechanical exercise.”