Page 1 of 15

NARHAR BALWANT THAKUR LAW COLLEGE, NASHIK.

Practical Presentation for
MOOT COURT NO. 02.
BEFORE

IN THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA, AT DELHI.

Criminal Appeal Nos. 483 of 2019

( Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 4608 of 2016 )

AND
Criminal Appeal Nos. 484 of 2019
( Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 4610 of 2016 )

Mr. Ripudaman Singh and Another ] Appellant

Verses

Mr. Balkrishna ] Respondent

TO,
THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA
AND IS COMPANION JUSTICES.

APPEAL AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT OF

SINGLE JUDGE OF HIGH COURT
OF MADHYA PRADESH.

Student Advocate Appearing on behalf of Appellants

Name :- Rishikesh Sunil Chandratre

College :- N.B.T. Law College Nashik.
Class :- LL.B.- III
Roll No. 49

FACULTY CO-ORDINATOR - PROF. Parekh Mam

 Page 2 of 15

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SR.
PARTICULARS PAGE NO.
NO.

1. COVER PAGE 1

2. TABLE OF CONTENTS 2

3. VAKALATNAMA 3

4. LIST OF ABBREVATION 4

5. INDEX OF AUTHORITY 5

6. STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION 6

7. STATEMENT OF FACTS 7 to 8

8. ISSUES AND ADVANCED ARGUMENTS 9 to 11

9. PRAYER 12

10. AFFIDAVIT OF APPELLANT 13

 Page 3 of 15

VAKALATNAMA

IN THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA, AT DELHI

IN
Criminal Appeal no. 483 /2019
( Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 4608 of 2016 )

AND
Criminal Appeal no. 484 /2019
( Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 4608 of 2016 )

Mr. Ripudaman Singh and Another ] Appellant

Verses

Mr. Balkrishna ] Respondent

I/ We Appellants Mr. Ripudaman Singh and Another in habitant

of Criminal Appeals in the side matter hereby appoint Mr.
Rishikesh Sunil Chandratre as Student Advocate to appear and
act for as my / our advocate / advocate’s for the said matter.

Witness my hand this 01th day of January in the year 2020.

Accepted by

(Sd/-)
1. Mr. Ripudaman Singh
(Sd/-)
 Page 4 of 15

2. Smt. Usha Singh

(Sd/-) Appellants
Student Advocate
(Mr. Rishikesh Sunil Chandratre)

Filed in Court ________________________

LIST OF ABBREVATIONS

● S.C. - SUPREME COURT

● H.C. - HIGH COURT

● HON’BLE - HONOURABLE

● SEC. - SECTION

● U/S. - UNDER SECTION

● SUB – SEC. - SUB – SECTION

● V/S. - VERSUS

● EXH. - EXHIBIT

● PARA - PARAGRAPH

● AIR - ALL INDIA REPORTER

● ILR - INDIAN LAW REPORTER

● BOM. L.R. - BOMBAY LAW REPORTER

● MH.L.J. - MAHARASHTRA LAW JOURNAL

● SLP. - SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION

 Page 5 of 15

INDEX OF AUTORITIES

BOOKS REFERRED :-

● THE NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT, 1881.

● THE INDIAN CONTRACT ACT, 1872.

● THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973.

● THE INDIAN LIMITATION ACT, 1963.

WEB SOURCES REFERRED :-

● http://www.indiankanoon.org.

● http://sci.gov.in

● http://bombayhighcourt.nic.in

● http://ecourtservices.gov.in

● http://mhljonline.com
 Page 6 of 15

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

It is hereinafter most respectfully submitted that this

hon’ble Supreme Court has the jurisdiction to entertain this
appeal under Article 136 of the Indian Constitution.

ARTICLE - 136 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.

Article 136 – Special Leave to Appeal to the Supreme

Court :-

● Notwithstanding anything in this chapter, the

Supreme Court may, in its discretion, grant
special leave to appeal from any judgement,
decree, determination, sentence or made in any
cause or matter passed or made by any court or
tribunal in the territory of India.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

The present Special Leave Petition is preferred against the final

judgement/order passed by the Single judge of High Court of
Madhya Pradesh. It is submitted that no intra-court appeal lies
against an order passed in a criminal appeal.
 Page 7 of 15

QUESTIONS OF LAW / ISSUES.

1. Whether Appeal is maintainable before Supreme court or

not ?

2. Whether the cheques are issued by respondent to appellant

in discharge of legal debt of liability ?

3. Whether the said cheques were dishonoured for the reason

insufficient fund in the account of respondent ?

4. Whether respondent served legal demand notices ?

5. Whether respondent trying to sale subject property and

accepted Consideration of Rs.3.79 crore of sale
transaction ?

BRIEF FACTS OF CASE

It is humbly submitted before this Hon’ble Court as under :

Your Honour,
1. This appeal filed by the Original Complainants
(Appellants) against Original Accused (Respondent),
against the Order of the Single Judge Bench of the
High Court of Madhya Pradesh quashing proceedings
being unsustainable quash and set aside.
2. The appellants are spouses. They agreed to sale a
agricultural land and entered into agreement to sell
dated 28 May, 2013 with the respondent. The sale
consideration was Rs. 1.75 Crores. The Rs. 1.25 Crores
was paid at the time of agreement to sell by cash and
as for the balance, two post dated cheques were issued,
each of the amount of Rs. 25 Lakhs.
 Page 8 of 15

3. The cheques were issued by the respondent in favour of

appellants in the present appeal. The details of the cheques
are as follows:-
(i) Cheque No. 297251 dated 3-6-2013 drawn on
Indusind Bank, Indore for an amount of Rs.
25,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs only) in
favour of Ripudaman Singh.
(ii) Cheque No. 297252 dated 2-7-2013 drawn on
Indusind Bank, Indore for an amount of Rs.
25,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs only) in
favour of Smt. Usha Singh.

4. Together with the agreement, the appellants executed a

General Power of Attorney in favour of the respondent. The
first of the two cheques deposited for the payment on 18
June 2013 it was returned unpaid with the remark of
“Insufficient Funds”. The second cheque dated 2 July 2013
was returned with the same remark by the banker, upon
deposit.

5. After issuing legal notices dated 21 June 2013 and 13

August 2013, the appellants instituted complaints under
section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 before
the JMFC.

6. The respondent filed two separate applications seeking

discharge in the respective complaint cases. These
applications were dismissed by the JMFC, Indore on 3
September, 2014. On 8 October, 2014 charges were framed
under section 138.

7. Then the respondent filed petition under section 482 of

Cr.P.C. before the High Court, Madhya Pradesh in which
the impugned order has been passed. While allowing the
petition, the High Court adverted to Clause 4 of the
agreement between the parties which is in the following
terms-

“That on the above property of the seller there is no family

disputes of any type nor is any case pending in the Court. If due to
 Page 9 of 15

any reason any dispute arises then all its responsibility would

remain of the selling party and the payment of cheques would be

after the resolution of the said disputes.”

8. The High Court held that a suit in respect of the land, Civil
Suit No. 4-A of 2012 is pending before the XIVth Additional
Sessions Judge, Indore since 2 September 2011 in which
the complainants/ appellants are arraigned as parties.

9. On the basis, the High Court held that under the term of
clause 4 of the agreement, the cheques could not have been
presented for payment. The cheques according to High
Court, have not been issued for creating any liability or
debt but for the payment of balance consideration. Holding
that the respondent did not owe any money to the
complainants, the complaint u/s 138 have been quashed.

10. As the General Power of Attorney issued by the appellants

in both the cases, the respondent entered into a sale
transaction in respect of the same property on 3 August
2013 for the total consideration of Rs. 3.79 Crores. But
remaining payment of the appellant was not paid to them.

ISSUES RISED AND ADVANCED ARGUMENTS

Issue No. 1-
Whether this appeal is maintainable before Supreme Court or
not?

Your honour,
The JMFC, Indore convicted the respondent and charges
was framed u/s 138 and dismissed the applications of discharge
filed by respondent.

The respondent filed a petition in the Single Bench of High

Court, Madhya Pradesh. High Court considering the facts and
circumstances and allowed this petition and set aside the order
 Page 10 of 15

of Lower Court.

This appeal is filed under Article 136 of the Constitution of

India in the Supreme Court of India challenging the impugned
order of Single Judge Bench of High Court of Madhya Pradesh.

Article 136 – Special Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court:-

“Notwithstanding anything in this chapter, the Supreme

Court may, in its discretion, grant special leave to appeal
from any judgement, decree, determination, sentence or
made in any cause or matter passed or made by any court or
tribunal in the territory of India. ”

Sir Chunilal V. Mehta and Sons Ltd. v Century

Spinning and Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (AIR 1962 SC
1314), that the proper test for determining whether a
question of law raised in a case is substantial would be
whether it is of general public importance or whether it
directly or substantially affects the rights of the parties and,
if so, whether it is an open question in the sense that it is not
finally settled by the Supreme Court or by the Privy Council
or by the Federal Court or is not free from difficulty or calls
for discussion of alternative views.

It is not possible to define with any precision the limitations

on the exercise of the discretionary jurisdiction vested in this
Court by the constitutional provision made in Article 136. The
limitations, whatever they be, are implicit in the nature and
character of the power itself.

Delhi judicial services Assn. V. State of Gujarat

The SC held that under article 136 the SC has wide power
to interfere and correct the judgement and order passed by
any court or tribunal in India .In addition to the appellate
power, the court has special residuary power to entertain
appeal against any order of any court.

Even if we assume that the case doesn't involve substantial

 Page 11 of 15

questions of law, SC in the exercise of its power conferred

under article 136 can entertain the present appeal. Article
136 uses the wording in any cause or matter . The givest
widest power to this court to deal with any cause or matter
even if it involves questions of fact.

This case establishes the position that the power of the SC in

appeal under article 136 are not restricted by the appellate
provision contained in the Crpc or any other statute.

Issue No. 2:-

Whether the cheques are issued by the respondent to the
appellant in discharge of legal debt or liability?

Your honour,

The said cheques no. 297251 and 297252 are issued by the
respondent for the payment of consideration of the sale contract,
for the contract of the sale of the agriculture property 1.75
Crores consideration was fixed out of this 1.25 Crores was paid
in cash and two cheques of Rs. 25 Lakhs each was issued in the
name of appellant Mr. Ripudaman Singh and Smt. Usha. This is
a legally enforceable debt and liability of the respondent to pay
the same. Hence this above mentioned post dated cheques were
issued for the payment of remaining consideration by this
respondent.

Issue No. 3:-

Whether the said cheques are dishonored for the reason
“Insufficient Funds” in the account of respondent?

Your honour,

This cheques were issued for the payment of balance

amount of the consideration of the sale transaction and it is
deposited for payment but the respondent intentionally not
maintained the sufficient amount in his account. The respondent
knows the cheques date because he issued two separate post
dated cheques for the payment of balance amount, hence it is a
need to maintain the balance in the account of the respondent
but he fails to do this, hence the cheques not cleared by the
 Page 12 of 15

banker and returned to the appellant with the remarks of

“Insufficient Funds” in the account of respondent.

Issue No. 4:-

Whether the respondent served with legal demand notices?

Your honour,

After the cheques returned to the appellant by the banker

with the remark of “Insufficient Funds”, the appellant issued a
two separate notices against the respondent on 21 June 2013
and 13 August 2013, the respondent fails to do act as per the
notice u/s 138 of N.I. Act, 1881, hence the appellant instituted
complaints u/s 138, respondent filed an two separate
applications for discharge JMFC dismissed the applications and
charge was framed by the JMFC, Indore against respondent on 3
September 2014.

Issue No. 5:-

Whether the respondent trying to sale subject property and
accepted consideration of Rs. 3.79 Crore for sale
transaction?

Your honour,

The appellant entered into an agreement to sell with the

respondent on 28 May 2013 for the consideration of Rs. 1.75
Crores out of this Rs. 1.25 Crores was paid at the time of
contract and for the remaining amount of Rs. 50 Lakhs, the two
post dated cheques were issued each of amount of Rs. 25 Lakhs
and also issued a General Power of Attorney in favour of the
respondent. As per that the respondent entered into sell contract
with another for the consideration Rs. 3.79 Crores. But not paid
the balance amount of the same subject property to the
appellant.

Hence the appellant most humbly and respectfully submitted

that, kindly be allowed the appeal and set aside the order of High
Court. And also the respondent kindly be punish u/s 138. The
amount of the cheques be recovered from the fine.
 Page 13 of 15

PRAYER

The appellants most humbly and respectfully submitted to this

Honourable Court that,

1. Kindly be allowed the appeal.

2. Set aside the order of Single Bench of High Court of

Judicature, Madhya Pradesh.

3. The respondent kindly be punish u/s 138 with

imposing fine.

4. The amount of the cheques Rs. 50 Lakhs be recovered

from the fine with interest.

5. Any other order kindly be passed in the interest of

Justice, good conscience as Court thinks fit.

For this act of kindness, this appellant shall forever humbly

pray.

Place : Delhi
Date : 01.01.2020
(Sd/-)
Mr. Ripudaman Singh
(Sd/-)
Smt. Usha Singh
Appellants
 Page 14 of 15

IN THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA, AT DELHI

IN
Criminal Appeal no. 483 /2019
( Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 4608 of 2016 )

AND
Criminal Appeal no. 484 /2019
( Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 4608 of 2016 )

Mr. Ripudaman Singh and Another ] Appellant

Verses

Mr. Balkrishna ] Respondent

AFFIDAVIT ON BEHALF OF APPELLANTS

I, Mr. Ripudaman Singh, do hereby solemnly affirm on oath

as under -

1. That, I am the Appellant in the above case and as such I

am fully conversant with the facts and proceedings of the
case.
2. That, I have read and understood the contents of the
paragraphs on all pages and I say that the facts stated
therein are true correct to my knowledge. Parties to the
present appeal are the same as they were before the court
below.
3. That, the annexure filed are true and correct to the best of
my knowledge.

Sd/-
Mr. Ripudaman Singh
Sd/-
Smt. Usha Singh
(APPELLANTS)
Verified at Delhi on this 01 Jan. 2020.
 Page 15 of 15

Sd/-

Mr. Rishikesh Sunil Chandratre

(Student Advocate for Appellants)