Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Sachin Annaso Chudappa Vs Hdfc Bank Ltd. and Anr. — Cheque Dishonour | Bombay HC (2013)

Home
Bombay HC
2013
Sachin Annaso Chudappa Vs Hdfc Bank Ltd. and Anr.Sachin Annaso Chudappa v. Hdfc Bank Ltd. and Anr.

Allowed

Sachin Annaso Chudappa v. Hdfc Bank Ltd. and Anr.

Bombay HC14 Aug 2013WP/307/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Bombay allowed a criminal writ petition and quashed the order of conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act after the petitioner deposited the cheque amount and compensation, with the respondent bank not pressing for conviction.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is allowed. The order of conviction is quashed and set aside. The original complainant is directed to receive the deposited amount from this Court.

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

The writ petition is allowed. The order of conviction is quashed and set aside. The original complainant is directed to receive the deposited amount from this Court.

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ petition challenging a conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is maintainable when the petitioner has deposited the involved amount. +2 more

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

The writ petitioner sought to challenge a conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Court held that since the petitioner deposited the entire amount involved and compensation, and the respondent bank did not press for conviction, the order of conviction was quashed and set aside. The writ petition was allowed and disposed of.

A compact analysis

This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.

A

wp307-13.sxw

1/2

Pvr

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.307 OF 2013

Shri.Sachin Annaso Chudappa …Petitioner versus 1.HDFC Bank Ltd. & Anr. ...Respondents

Mr.Tushar Pimple, for Petitioner.

Mr.Chetan Agrawal, for Respondent no.1.

Mr.A.R.Patil, APP for State-Respondent no.2.

--- CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL, J.

DATED : 14^th AUGUST, 2013

P.C. :

Heard.

The writ petitioner is permitted to deposit Rs.23,000/- (Rupees Twenty Three Thousand only) with this Court. Office to accept the same.

According to the learned Counsel, it covers the entire amount involved in the transaction.

Heard again. Conviction under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act could not be challenged before the learned Additional Sessions Judge for removing office objections and consequently, the writ petition.

wp307-13.sxw

2/2

Pvr

Primarily, I do not see any error in the order of learned JMFC Court Room no.8, Kolhapur, dated 22.8.2012.

The amount covered by cheque and the compensation is deposited. Learned Counsel for respondent - HDFC Bank agrees that such amounts are deposited and he is not pressing for conviction.

In the result, writ petition is allowed. The order of conviction referred to above, is quashed and set aside. The original complainant to receive deposited amount from this Court.

The writ petitioner says, there will not be any default in regular installment payable to the respondent-bank.

Writ petition is disposed of.

(K.U.CHANDIWAL, J.)

Issues for consideration

3 issues framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether a writ petition challenging a conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is maintainable when the petitioner has deposited the involved amount.
2.
Whether the order of conviction should be quashed upon deposit of the cheque amount and compensation.
3.
Whether the writ petition should be allowed to quash the order of conviction.

Statutes considered

1 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

Negotiable Instruments Act138

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
Shri. Sachin Annaso Chudappa
respondent
HDFC Bank Ltd.

Coram

AI extract

K.U.CHANDIWAL

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Bombay HC
Decided on: 14 Aug 2013 · August
Registered: 22 Jan 2013
Case no.: WP/307/2013
CNR: HCBM010033352013
Topic: Cheque Dishonour
Bench: K.u. Chandiwal
Disposal: OTHERS DISPOSED OFF

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from K.u. Chandiwal

Sanjay Shankar Sagale Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.
13 Aug 2013
Devi Shivanesan and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.
13 Aug 2013
Mohd Shahid Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.
13 Aug 2013
Gulabi Narayan Pujari Vs Shilpa Sadashiv Shetty and Anr.
14 Aug 2013
Mahaveer Bapu Khot Vs Ajit Appasaheb Vagyani and Anr.
14 Aug 2013
Nilkanth C. Joshi and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.
14 Aug 2013

Cite this judgement

Sachin Annaso Chudappa v. Hdfc Bank Ltd. and Anr., WP/307/2013 (BOM), decided on 14 August 2013.

The Bombay High Court publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes1

Negotiable Instruments Act138

View all statutes

Bench / Coram

K.U.CHANDIWAL

Parties & counsel