Cheque bounce due to wrong account no

YES, prima facie offence of 138 is made out. you yourself write the letter to other side and inform about the fact and initiate complaint against your staff.

I am sorry.  No fraudster can go to Court and establish himself of his theft generally.  I never heard so far that Account No. differs is a reason that is having an effect.  In fact, there are many inconsistencies in the post.  No Bank can issue a cheque book without proper No.  If the bank issued a cheque book in that manner, first issue notice to them for issuing  cheque book without printing account number.

In collusion with bank officials is ignorance and  wild allegation.  Every Bank employee knows fundamentals  that account number is required in a cheque,  and the system first checks the account number and cheque number.   He should have atleast tracked the account number and placed it on cheque.

The post is appearing as a quiz question.  Contact any known banker to get  more clarification.

According to my knowledge, some one has acquired a cheque, and put a different account number.  The hand writing  in Account number helps in catching the real culprit.

If the entire post is true, even before such 138 is booked, drawer must report loss of cheque and file a complaint against that person that presented the cheque and take offensive action, before falling in defence in future.

I have made a police complaint against the staff and bank official, the police are investigating. Lets see what happens. I had informed the bank and police earlier about the loss of cheque book, but I had informed via speed post.

Originally posted by : G.L.N. Prasad
	I am sorry.  No fraudster can go to Court and establish himself of his theft generally.  I never heard so far that Account No. differs is a reason that is having an effect.  In fact, there are many inconsistencies in the post.  No Bank can issue a cheque book without proper No.  If the bank issued a cheque book in that manner, first issue notice to them for issuing  cheque book without printing account number. In collusion with bank officials is ignorance and  wild allegation.  Every Bank employee knows fundamentals  that account number is required in a cheque,  and the system first checks the account number and cheque number.   He should have atleast tracked the account number and placed it on cheque. The post is appearing as a quiz question.  Contact any known banker to get  more clarification. According to my knowledge, some one has acquired a cheque, and put a different account number.  The hand writing  in Account number helps in catching the real culprit. If the entire post is true, even before such 138 is booked, drawer must report loss of cheque and file a complaint against that person that presented the cheque and take offensive action, before falling in defence in future.

The account number is entered wrong , it was old cheque where in you have to enter the account number manually. I collusion with bank officials with that I mean that the  cheque depositing bank branch and not the bank which issued my cheque in the first place. 

Have they provided copy of FIR ?

What is the present status of investigation ?

Make a follow up through seeking such information under RTI. 

When you post query, you have to provide those facts/steps taken by you in detail to save other's time.

Yes they have provided copy of FIR, and have called the staff and bank officials for questiioning. They have taken my statement and also statement of other staff who corraborated the same story.

Thank you for Heads up. Next time I will provide all details in one go.

This  is absurd.

There are two bankers involved.

One is collecting banker:  Who has to accept any cheque that is submitted by any of his depositor for collection and credit, without looking into enforceability and validity of the cheque.  His responsibility include Collection in good faith and not particulars appearing in Cheque.

How collecting banker is involved if some one puts some account number in some one's cheque, belonging to some other bank ?

Can you blame the bank without knowing the system ?

Do you know that those cheques without account number can never be issued by Bank and now the cheque should be only MICR with IFSC  codeto be presented through clearing and these operations are done through colelcting those instruments from a BOX and through digital mode  ?

Then how you can blame a collecting banker collusion.  This is a gross error.  Let the police decide facts.

I am talking about co operative bank.  Yes the I guess police will investigate. Since in the second bank my Loan is due but I have contested the loan amount and Its in pending abjudication in DRAT 

Through posts,  any prudent person can guess that some link is missing and query is cryptic.

Now you are coming with facts one by one. Like blaming collecting Banker, your dues, NPA status, pending before DRT etc.,which were not disclosed in your first post, though these facts are material.

I am sure that the payee, you are referring to may also be a Bank.

The following  was your first  query

The blank signed  cheques was kept with staff who posted it via speed post to bank in collusion with officials of the bank, However not knowing knowing account number, he filled completely different account number, bank deposited the cheque,  and the bank of accused returned the cheque citing the endorsement " Account number doesn't match with cheque number" 

Will the provision of NI Act will be applicable?

If the payee is a bank, they can establish consideration towards loan repayment.

 

If my apprehensions are correct the collecting bank must have been the Branch, where he was declared as NPA, and case is pending before DRT.

Then it may make the problem more complicated for the member who issued the cheque, who complained to the Police, as it is not easy to believe what ever one states.

The million dollar question that queriest never answered is:   Who is beneficiary of that cheque amount ?  

(Bank can not be a beneficiary as it do not keep any such amounts collected, but always collects for and on behalf of some depositor or Borrower.)