SC Upholds HC’s Bail Cancellation If Cheque Amount is Not Paid to Creditor, Imposes Rs. 5 Lakhs Cost

Case Details: Satish P. Bhatt v. State of Maharashtra - [2024] 158 taxmann.com 139 (SC)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• • Vikram Nath & Rajesh Bindal, JJ.

Facts of the Case

The facts in the instant case reveal a scenario characterized by a consistent neglect of court directives and a casual attitude towards legal and financial obligations. Further, the Petitioner’s conduct served as an illustration of how an individual’s indifferent approach to financial responsibilities and court orders can erode the core principles of judicial effectiveness.

In the present case, the High Court took a firm stance against the appellant’s continued failure to fulfil his financial obligations, culminating in the cancellation of his bail and suspension of sentence in cheque bounce case.

Subsequently, through an order dated 23.07.2019, the High Court revoked both the suspension of sentence and bail that had been initially granted to the appellant and petitioner before the High Court.

This action was taken due to their breach of the commitment made on 03.07.2018, wherein they had undertaken to settle the dues with the complainant-creditor. This undertaking was recorded in the order of the same date. Moreover, they also violated the conditions outlined in paragraph 3 of the order dated 20.03.2019, which had granted an extension of time for compliance.

Consequently, an appeal was preferred with the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court observed that there was no illegality in the order passed by the High Court. The appeal was accordingly dismissed with costs quantified at Rs. 5 lakhs to be paid to the Complainant within four weeks from today.

Further, it was clarified that this amount of costs will not be adjusted against the compensation awarded to the respondent but will be in addition to it. It was further directed that the appellant and the intervenor to surrender within a period of four weeks from today to undergo the sentence.

Supreme Court Held

The Supreme Court held that in the event of non-surrender, the High Court should employ suitable coercive measures to ensure the execution of the sentence. The revisions filed before the High Court were still awaiting resolution.

Additionally, the High Court is directed to proceed with the adjudication of these revisions, along with any pending applications. It is crucial to ensure full compliance with the undertaken commitments and provide appropriate compensation to the complainant for any further distress caused.