Man convicted in cheque bounce case, ordered to pay Rs 13L
TNN | Oct 27, 2018, 04:00 ISTRajkot: A local court in Tankara town of Morbi district ordered a man to pay Rs 13 lakh to a finance company owner in a cheque bounce case.
Convict Dharmesh Sisangia had borrowed Rs five lakh from his friend Ajayrajsinh Zala, a private financier, for a medical emergency in 2016. Zala transferred Rs five lakh through RTGS, sent Rs one lakh through courier and gave him Rs four lakh cash. Dharmesh issued A cheque of Rs 10 lakh dated November 5, 2016. However, when Zala deposited the cheque, it was returned by the bank citing insufficient funds.
Dharmesh was convicted under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.
Ajayraj’s advocate Chetan Soriya said, “The court ordered him to pay Rs 13 lakh within one month, failing which he would have to undergo six months imprisonment.”
Principal civil judge N K Yadav noted in the order that “Object of the Act is to promote the business transactions and economy. The object of bringing section 138 on the statute appears to be to inculcate faith in the efficiency of banking operations and credibility in the transacting business on negotiable instrument.”
Court further noted: “Wrong message would be given to the society if such socio-economic offenders are treated with leniency.”
Convict Dharmesh Sisangia had borrowed Rs five lakh from his friend Ajayrajsinh Zala, a private financier, for a medical emergency in 2016. Zala transferred Rs five lakh through RTGS, sent Rs one lakh through courier and gave him Rs four lakh cash. Dharmesh issued A cheque of Rs 10 lakh dated November 5, 2016. However, when Zala deposited the cheque, it was returned by the bank citing insufficient funds.
Dharmesh was convicted under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.
Ajayraj’s advocate Chetan Soriya said, “The court ordered him to pay Rs 13 lakh within one month, failing which he would have to undergo six months imprisonment.”
Principal civil judge N K Yadav noted in the order that “Object of the Act is to promote the business transactions and economy. The object of bringing section 138 on the statute appears to be to inculcate faith in the efficiency of banking operations and credibility in the transacting business on negotiable instrument.”
Court further noted: “Wrong message would be given to the society if such socio-economic offenders are treated with leniency.”
All Comments ()+^ Back to Top
Refrain from posting comments that are obscene, defamatory or inflammatory, and do not indulge in personal attacks, name calling or inciting hatred against any community. Help us delete comments that do not follow these guidelines by marking them offensive. Let's work together to keep the conversation civil.
HIDE