Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Bupinder Lima and Others Vs. State of A.P. and Another

Bupinder Lima and Others vs State of A.P. and Another

Type Court Judgment Court Andhra Pradesh Decided Sep 08, 1999
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/441917

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Crl. P. No. 3111 of 1999
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Criminal - illegal proceedings - Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - prosecution of legal heirs for issuance of dishonoured cheque by expired predecessor - criminal liability does not pass on to legal heirs - held, prosecution of legal heirs illegal. - - Lima and as the notices were sent to them a...

Key legal issue
Criminal
Acts & sections
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Sections 138

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Bupinder Lima and Others

Advocate Mr. K. Srinivasa Reddy, Adv.

Respondent

State of A.P. and Another

Advocate Public Prosecutor and ;Mr. Jalli Kanakaiah, Adv.

Legal References

Acts
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Sections 138
Reported In
1999(6)ALD143; 1999(2)ALD(Cri)795; 1999(6)ALT101; [2000]99CompCas424(AP)

Excerpt

criminal - illegal proceedings - section 138 of negotiable instruments act, 1881 - prosecution of legal heirs for issuance of dishonoured cheque by expired predecessor - criminal liability does not pass on to legal heirs - held, prosecution of legal heirs illegal. - - lima and as the notices were sent to them also and that they failed to send reply to notices they may also be held liable under section 138 of the negotiable instruments act. i have no doubt in my mind that the petitioners herein cannot be prosecutedfor the offence under section 138 of the negotiable instruments act for the alleged failure of late a......sides.2. this petition under section 482 of cr.pc has been filed for quashing the proceedings in cc no.194 of 1999 on the file of the x metropolitan magistrate, secunderabad in which the petitioners are sought to be prosecuted for an offence under section 138 of the negotiable instruments act.3. it appears that one a. v. lima issued a cheque in favour of the complainanttowards payment of some legally enforceable debt in a sum of rs.70,000/-. the cheque was presented for realisation by the complainant to his banker. it is said to have been returned on the ground of insufficiency of funds to the credit of the account of the said a. v. lima. thereupon, the complainant is said to have issued a notice as required under section 138 of the negotiable instruments act on 25-2-1999 to said a.v. lima and to the petitioners herein. the notice was sent to the said a. v. lima by registered post with acknowledgment due, and it was returned on 27-2-1999 with a postal endorsement 'party expired to the sender'. later, the complainant got it confirmed that the said a.v. lima was no more. therefore, the said complaint has been filed against the petitioners for an offence under section 138 of the negotiable instruments act.4. the learned counsel for the petitioners contends that when the person who is alleged to have committed the offence under section 138 of the negotiable instruments act has died, the criminal liability abates and the question of his wife and daughters (petitioners herein) being criminally liable for the offence under section 138 of the negotiable instruments act does not arise.5. the learned counsel for the respondent no.2 on the other hand contends, as the petitioners were aware of the issue of the cheque by the late a.v. lima and as the notices were sent to them also and that they failed to send reply to notices they may also be held liable under section 138 of the negotiable instruments act.6. it is inconceivable that criminal liability can be fastened to the.....

Full Judgment

ORDER

1. Heard both sides.

2. This petition under Section 482 of Cr.PC has been filed for quashing the proceedings in CC No.194 of 1999 on the file of the X Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad in which the petitioners are sought to be prosecuted for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

3. It appears that one A. V. Lima issued a cheque in favour of the complainanttowards payment of some legally enforceable debt in a sum of Rs.70,000/-. The cheque was presented for realisation by the complainant to his banker. It is said to have been returned on the ground of insufficiency of funds to the credit of the account of the said A. V. Lima. Thereupon, the complainant is said to have issued a notice as required under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act on 25-2-1999 to said A.V. Lima and to the petitioners herein. The notice was sent to the said A. V. Lima by registered post with acknowledgment due, and it was returned on 27-2-1999 with a postal endorsement 'party expired to the sender'. Later, the complainant got it confirmed that the said A.V. Lima was no more. Therefore, the said complaint has been filed against the petitioners for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

4. The learned Counsel for the petitioners contends that when the person who is alleged to have committed the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act has died, the criminal liability abates and the question of his wife and daughters (petitioners herein) being criminally liable for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act does not arise.

5. The learned Counsel for the respondent No.2 on the other hand contends, as the petitioners were aware of the issue of the cheque by the late A.V. Lima and as the notices were sent to them also and that they failed to send reply to notices they may also be held liable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

6. It is inconceivable that criminal liability can be fastened to the heirs and the legal representatives of the person who is said to have been guilty of the offence in question. I have no doubt in my mind that the petitioners herein cannot be prosecutedfor the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for the alleged failure of late A. V. Lima in meeting the liability to pay the amount covered by the cheque which was dishonoured in response to the notice sent by the complainant.

7. Under the circumstances, this is a case where the proceedings in CC No.194 of 1999 on the file of the X Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad deserve to be quashed. The petition is allowed accordingly and the proceedings in CC No.194 of 1999 on the file of the X Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad are quashed. No costs.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial