New Delhi, Sep 11 A Delhi court has acquitted a man in a nine-year-old cheque dishonour case, saying that the complainant failed to satisfactorily prove he had the financial capacity to advance a loan of Rs 18 lakh.
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Surabhi Rastogi was hearing a case against a South Extension resident, Mohit Suri, and acquitted him of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in a complaint filed by Rajesh Kumar Rana in 2017.
"It can be concluded that the accused was successful in raising probable defence on the point of financial incapacity of the complainant to advance the alleged loan to the accused," the court said in its order on Thursday.
According to the complaint, Rana had extended a friendly loan of Rs 18 lakh to Suri in March 2016 that was to be repaid within eight months.
For the repayment of the loan, Suri allegedly issued a cheque for the amount that bounced due to "insufficient funds". Despite a legal demand notice, the amount was not paid, prompting the criminal complaint.
Suri, represented by advocate Fahad Mustafa, denied taking any friendly loan and contended that the cheque was handed over as a blank, signed security instrument after the complainant offered to arrange a smaller loan of Rs 4-5 lakh for him.
Mustafa argued that the complainant, whose annual income was stated to be around Rs 8 lakh, did not have the financial wherewithal to advance a sum as large as Rs 18 lakh in cash.
The defence further submitted that the complainant's claim of having sourced the funds from his late father's bank account after the sale of land remained unsubstantiated as no bank statement, sale deed or income tax record was ever placed before the court despite repeated opportunities over several years.
The court noted that while the accused had admitted his signature on the cheque, triggering a statutory presumption in the complainant's favour under Sections 118 and 139 of the NI Act, this presumption stood rebutted once reasonable doubt was raised over the complainant's ability to arrange such a large sum.
"The grounds of defence taken by the accused have sufficiently rebutted the presumption of existence of legally enforceable debt against him," the court said.
The court also said that a subsequent settlement cheque of Rs 2 lakh offered by Suri during trial could not, by itself, be treated as an admission of guilt, since parties often settle disputes to buy peace.
Accepting the defence arguments, the court held that the complainant had failed to prove the existence of a legally enforceable debt beyond reasonable doubt, and acquitted Suri of the charge.
