Supreme Court Overturns High Court's Erroneous Conviction in Cheque Bounce Case, High Court's Reversal of Acquittal in Negotiable Instruments Act Case Found Unjustified; Supreme Court Directs Compounding of Offence
In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India, comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, has set aside a judgment by the High Court of Judicature at Madras that had reversed the acquittal of A. Balakumar, accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The apex court found that the High Court had overstepped its jurisdiction by entertaining an appeal against acquittal after an appellate court had already affirmed the trial court’s decision.
The case originated from a complaint filed by Prof. Mohanraj against Balakumar for the dishonour of a cheque amounting to Rs. 2 lakhs. The trial court acquitted Balakumar, a decision upheld by the XVIII Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai, in January 2020. However, the High Court later reversed this acquittal, convicting Balakumar and sentencing him to six months of simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 4 lakhs.
Upon appeal, the Supreme Court highlighted a crucial procedural error, noting that the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, does not allow an appeal to the High Court once appellate jurisdiction has been exercised. The appropriate course of action would have been for the complainant to invoke the High Court’s revisional jurisdiction under Sections 397 and 401 of the CrPC, which does not permit converting acquittal into conviction.
The Supreme Court emphasized that during revision, the High Court can only order a new trial if the original judgment is manifestly illegal or perverse. It cannot directly convict an accused if the acquittal is already affirmed by a lower appellate court.
During the proceedings, Balakumar proposed a settlement, offering Rs. 4 lakhs to the complainant. Accepting this resolution, the Supreme Court directed the compounding of the offence under Section 147 of the NI Act, 1881, and subsequently set aside the High Court’s judgment. Balakumar was acquitted of the charge under Section 138 of the NI Act.
The Supreme Court's decision underscores the importance of adhering to procedural laws and reaffirms the limitations of appellate and revisional jurisdictions.
Bottom Line:
High Court cannot entertain an appeal against acquittal when appellate jurisdiction has already been exercised by a subordinate court. The only permissible remedy is invoking the revisional jurisdiction under Sections 397 and 401 of the CrPC.
Statutory provision(s):
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Sections 138, 147; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Sections 397, 401
A. Balakumar v. Prof. Mohanraj, (SC) : Law Finder Doc id # 2885709
