A man was hit by bullets on his thigh and abdomen. Eleven days later, he died of septicaemia. The accused was convicted of murder. He contended that he had no intention of murder. The doctor’s report stated that the victim could have been saved if the bullets had been recovered from his body during treatment. The Rajasthan High Court, however, held the accused guilty of culpable homicide not amounting to murder as he certainly knew that bullet injuries could lead to death (Bijjo alias Brij Kishore vs State of Rajasthan).
A notice was sent for the payment of a cheque amount (Rs 40,000) plus interest. When the money was not sent within the stipulated period, a complaint was made. The accused contended that the notice was invalid as the complaint did not lie under the provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act, and therefore, the notice provides for the demand of the cheque amount only. The trial court dismissed the complaint. The Kerala High Court held that the notice is invalid if the total amount alone is demanded with- out specifying the cheque amount. But since in this case it was mentioned, the notice should not be dismissed (M. Shamsudheen vs V.P. Sounder Rajan).
The managing director of a hotel accused two bank officers of sanctioning a loan that was not disbursed. Consequently, the hotel suffered monetary loss. The officers also made false promises, based on which the complainant made repayments that were not adjusted by the bank. The officers accepted the charges, but said it did not amount to criminal offence as the dispute was purely civil in nature. The Orissa High Court quashed the complaint, saying that the allegations did not indicate any dishonest intention on the officers’ part. Rather, it gave the feeling that the complaint was lodged with a motive to pressurise the officers and create further grounds for litigation (Lingaraj Mahapatra vs State of Orissa).
SOLON
