Ashish Singla 098140 76600 (Cheque Victim's Lawyer. LUDHIANA (PB)) 02 April 2015

Cheque having only account no. in payee coulmn.

Hi Friends and Experts...

Accused took a vehicle loan from SBP (State Bank Of Patiala). The bank opened a term loan account with one of its own branch in the name of accused and transfered loan amount in that account. The account No. allotted to this term loan account is 1234567890 in the name of accused. The bank also took security cheques from accused of his another saving account with OBC.

Default held up - The concerned Bank filled up CROSSED/ACCOUNT PAYEE cheque of accused, from its own custody, in the following way, got bounced and filed the complainant u/s 138 of N I Act....

In payee' column..... "A/C No. 1234567890 with SBP"

There is no name of concerned bank as payee in payee's column in cheque in question....

Is cheque bounce case is attracted with valid cheque, on the holder in due course basis or in-house-transaction..?

Pl update with law..

Thanks...

Reply Follow

2 Replies

LAXMINARAYAN - Sr Advocate. ( solve problems in criminal cases. lawproblems@gmail.com) 03 April 2015

You have been posting many queries for cheque bounce, whether replies have helped you to win the case.

2) In the present case whether the name of accused has been put or not..

R Trivedi (advocate.dma@gmail.com) 03 April 2015

This type of payee descripttion is standard practice, very much prevalent in customs duty payment etc in the past before epayment.

My stand in this case is as follows and it has very high chances of favourable decision...

1. It will be simple to ascertain in this case, that the cheque was Blank when given

2. It will be simple to prove in this case that the cheque was delivered much before 6 months (read S.138(a) and S.46 of NI Act along with S.118(b) on date.

3. Most importantly Bank will have some kind of counter security, someone's inability to pay is not a crime and cannot be punished if his property is under this Bank's control....the right approach for the bank is claim its dues through civil proceedings using this property......this point alone must, I repeat must, result into acquittal....unless of course the Hon courts upto Supreme Court end up forgetting what the natural justice is.