सीजेआई चंद्रचूड़ ने सुप्रीम कोर्ट परिसर में आयुष समग्र कल्याण केंद्र का उद्घाटन किया
CJI Inaugurates AYUSH Holistic Wellness Centre at SC Premises
National subsidized community kitchens: SC declines to pass directions
Calcutta HC Grants Bail to TV Journalist Arrested in Sandeshkhali by WB Police
Vedanta's bid to resume Tuticorin smelter faces scrutiny from court
Bombay HC Quashes Look-Out Circulars Against Actor Rhea Chakraborty, Brother Showik, and Father
Journalist Files Petition in P&H HC Demanding FIR Against Haryana Police for Tear Gas Shell Incident During Farmers' Protest Coverage
Delhi HC Asserts Doctrine of Absolute Privilege: Bars Claims Against Judges, Counsel, Witnesses, or Parties in Judicial Proceedings
Manipur HC Amends 2023 Order, Alters Direction on Meiteis' ST Inclusion
Allahabad HC Deems Non-Appearance of Advocates in Listed Cases as Professional Misconduct and Bench Hunting
Wife Not Liable for Husband's Joint Account Cheque Under Section 138: Punjab and Haryana HC

Wife Not Liable for Husband's Joint Account Cheque Under Section 138: Punjab and Haryana HC

The Punjab and Haryana High Court ruled that the wife cannot be held accountable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for a cheque issued by her husband from their shared account.

The Court, in dismissing criminal proceedings against the Wife, highlighted that the legal provision pertains solely to the drawer of a dishonoured cheque who fails to fulfill payment obligations.

Justice NS Shekhawat's bench emphasized, "Considering the circumstances, it's evident that the petitioner holds no liability for the cheque drawn by her husband from their joint account."

Advocate Karan Suneja appeared for the Petitioners and Advocate RK Chaudhary appeared for the Respondent.

The Petitioner invoked Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) to quash criminal proceedings under Section 138 of the NI Act. Her husband issued a cheque of Rs. 5,00,000/- that bounced due to insufficient funds, prompting the payee (Respondent) to file a complaint under Section 138.

The Petitioner argued that she couldn't be prosecuted as she didn't issue or sign the cheque. The Court concurred, stating that Section 138 only applies to the drawer who defaults on payment after the cheque bounce, absolving the Petitioner as she wasn't the cheque's drawer.

The Bench emphasized that the mere status of being the spouse of the co-accused doesn't establish liability for the offense. It pointed out that an exception exists when the drawer of the cheque is a company, in which case both the person in charge of the company and the company itself can be held accountable.

Furthermore, citing the case of Aparna A Shah v M/s Sheth Developers P. Ltd, the Court reaffirmed that the Petitioner isn't accountable for the cheque drawn from their joint account by her husband. However, the Court upheld the proceedings against her husband, who had signed the cheque. Consequently, the Court granted the Petition, terminating the criminal proceedings against the Petitioner.

Accordingly, the Court accepted the Petition and quashed the criminal proceedings against Petitioner.

Case Title: Shalu Arora v Tanu Bathla (2023:PHHC:152038)

Click here to Read/Download the Order

Share this News

Website designed, developed and maintained by webexy