‘Hasty justice is stepmother of misfortune’: Punjab and Haryana High Court warns against rushing cheque bounce trials

The high court further pointed out that justice which is “tardy” undermines constitutional protections, while justice that is “hasty” compromises procedural equity, emphasising the requirement of a judicious balance between the two.

‘Cheque holders turned courts into recovery agents’

• The court observed that cheque holders often turn courts into recovery agents by paying minimal court fees, which in some states are as low as Rs 2.
• Referring to the huge volume of criminal cases filed over dishonoured cheques, the court noted that the proverb “When you are at the edge of a cliff, sometimes progress is a step backwards” needs to be kept in mind.
• The goal of swift justice has been undermined by the large volume of cheque bounce cases that have flooded criminal courts over time.
• The court also observed that despite the country’s progress in digital payments, the paper cheque continues to remain in use, even though systems such as the Unified Payments Interface (UPI) have significantly transformed the payment landscape.
• It further pointed out that violations of scheduled digital payments are already addressed through the Payments and Settlement Systems Act, 2007.

‘State never truly loser’

• In the current consumption-driven economies, the governments occupy a distinctively insulated position where almost every commercial transaction benefits the government, irrespective of whether private parties gain or lose.
• Whenever a product or service is sold, the government derives revenue in the form of tax at the point of sale.
• If a cheque fails, the government’s revenue position remains unaffected, and the burden disproportionately falls on both the drawer and the holder.

• Taxes once paid are not refunded merely because the payment failed at the counter.
• The state is never truly a loser since its primary concern is the continuous circulation of money within the economy.
• This explains the government’s policy of pressing paddles on consumption cycles, whereby companies are encouraged to sell through easy credit, EMIs, advance payments, and post-dated instruments.
• Such mechanisms stimulate demand and ensure that transactions occur, even if the risk is quietly transferred to private parties.

‘Cheque bounce cases, significance of mediation’

• The cheque bounce cases are punitive yet primarily aimed at compensating the holder of the cheque for the dishonoured amount.
• In such a scenario, mediation offers a more rational, humane, and economically sound alternative.
• An early-stage mediation can ensure quicker recovery for the cheque holder and preserve business relationships.
• Mediation may be perceived as slower at the threshold, but it offers a more substantive and outcome-oriented resolution.
• Mediation does not weaken justice, but it strengthens it by delivering timely, balanced, and commercially sensible results.
• Cheque bounce cases arise from the non-payment of a legally enforceable debt or liability.
• In simple language, ‘drawer’ is the person who draws the cheque by putting signatures on it; the tank which debits the account from which the drawer has issued the cheque is the ‘drawee’, and the person in whose favour the cheque is issued is called ‘payee’.
• Cheques are commonly used as a convenient and reliable method of deferred payment in both commercial and personal transactions to facilitate smooth business dealings and reflect the mutual trust and confidence placed by one party in another.
• When such a cheque is returned unpaid due to insufficient funds or reasons attributable to the drawer, the law considers it a breach of financial trust.
• This leads to lengthy legal proceedings, which often cause delays, diminish the amount involved, and result in financial loss for the complainant.
• This delay undermines the law’s goal of providing compensation and adds to the burden on the justice system.

‘Cheque bounce case of Rs 19,49 lakh’

• The observations came while the court was dealing with a revision petition arising from a cheque bounce case.
• One complainant Kulbir Singh had filed a complaint alleging that a cheque of Rs 19.49 lakh issued by the accused in connection with business dealings was dishonoured after payment was stopped by the drawer.
• During the proceedings, the accused sought permission to examine a handwriting and fingerprint expert to compare signatures on a power of attorney
• However, the trial court noted that the accused had already availed 15 opportunities to conclude defence evidence and rejected the request, observing that the application appeared to be an attempt to delay the trial at its final stage.

‘Can give a try to mediation’

• Appearing for the petitioner, advocate Amandeep Singh submitted that he would persuade his client to settle the matter in mediation.

• He also emphasised that his application for additional evidence must be considered by the court.
• He further submitted that keeping in view the long business relations between the parties, they would like to give mediation a try.

‘Delaying the matter’

• Appearing for the complainant, advocate Viren Sibal opposed the application for further evidence and submitted that the trial is at the fag-end.
• He submitted that to delay a sure-shot conviction, the petitioner has cooked up a story and filed an application for examining a handwriting and fingerprint expert, which was rightly rejected, and now, to further delay the matter, he has come up before this court.
• He further added that they will make every effort to conclude the mediation at the earliest and make earnest efforts to settle the matter.