TAUSEEF AHMAD
MAGAM-BUDGAM, June 15: A court in Magam has convicted a Baramulla-based fruit trader in a cheque bounce case arising from an apple business transaction, sentencing him to two months’ simple imprisonment and directing him to pay ₹3.64 lakh as compensation to the complainant.
Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMIC) Magam, Rabyia Snober Gulzar, pronounced the judgment on Monday, holding Mohammad Akbar Dar of Hyder Bagh Khambyar, Pattan, guilty under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act after finding that two cheques issued by him towards payment for apple boxes were dishonoured due to insufficient funds and that he subsequently failed to clear the liability despite receiving a statutory legal notice.
The case stemmed from a commercial transaction during the 2022 apple season. According to the complaint, Ali Mohammad Pandith, a fruit trader from Kandhama in Beerwah, supplied around 1,250 apple boxes to the accused for a total consideration of approximately ₹3.80 lakh. The complainant alleged that while the accused repeatedly promised payment, he ultimately issued two cheques—one for ₹1.05 lakh and another for ₹2 lakh—which were later returned unpaid by the bank.
The court noted that after the cheques were dishonoured, the complainant served a legal notice demanding payment within the statutory period prescribed under law. However, despite receipt of the notice, the accused failed to liquidate the amount, compelling the complainant to approach the court in March 2023.
During the trial, the complainant testified that the accused had initially engaged in successful business dealings and had made payments in earlier transactions, creating a relationship of trust between the parties. The dispute arose when the accused allegedly lifted a larger consignment of apples but failed to honour his financial commitments. According to the complainant, the cheques were issued only after repeated demands and intervention by local elders who attempted to facilitate a settlement.
The prosecution examined multiple witnesses who supported the complainant’s version and spoke about the business transaction, the outstanding liability and the issuance of cheques. Witnesses also testified that repeated efforts were made to recover the amount and that the accused had on several occasions assured payment.
A crucial part of the prosecution’s case came from a bank official who appeared before the court and confirmed that the disputed cheques had been presented through the complainant’s account at J&K Bank’s Magam branch. The witness proved the cheque return memos and stated that both instruments were dishonoured because the balance available in the accused’s account was insufficient to honour them.
The accused, however, denied the allegations and claimed that he had no business dealings with the complainant. He asserted that his transactions were with another individual, Bashir Ahmad, and maintained that any cheques issued by him were connected to those dealings rather than to the complainant.
He also disputed the execution of the cheques and denied liability towards the complainant.
The court found the defence unconvincing. The judgment records that despite repeated opportunities, the accused failed to produce any witness or documentary evidence to support his version. No records were brought before the court to establish the alleged alternative transaction or to explain how the disputed cheques, drawn on the accused’s own bank account, had reached the complainant.
The magistrate also rejected the accused’s challenge to the territorial jurisdiction of the court. The defence had argued that the matter should have been tried elsewhere because the cheques were allegedly presented as bearer instruments. The court held that the cheques had been routed through the complainant’s account maintained at J&K Bank, Magam, thereby giving the Magam court the authority to entertain and decide the complaint under the amended provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
Addressing the accused’s denial of signatures, the court observed that the cheques were dishonoured due to “insufficient funds” and not because of any signature mismatch. It further noted that the signatures appearing on the instruments were consistent with signatures available on judicial records and held that the execution of the cheques stood proved.
After examining the oral testimony, documentary evidence and statutory presumptions available under the Negotiable Instruments Act, the court concluded that the complainant had successfully established all ingredients of the offence beyond reasonable doubt. The judgment observed that once issuance of the cheques had been proved, the law presumed that they were issued towards discharge of a legally enforceable debt, and the accused had failed to rebut that presumption through any credible evidence.
Holding the accused guilty, the court sentenced him to two months’ simple imprisonment and directed him to pay compensation of ₹3.64 lakh to the complainant within one month. The court further ordered that in the event of non-payment, recovery proceedings may be initiated in accordance with law, including attachment and sale of the accused’s movable and immovable properties through the District Collector, Budgam, for realization of the compensation amount.
The judgment marks the culmination of a three-year legal battle and reinforces the legal consequences of cheque dishonour in commercial transactions, particularly in Kashmir’s fruit trade where business dealings frequently operate on personal trust and oral arrangements.
