Yes I am also of same opinion.
But recently( 25 June 2015 ) MP HC has given contrary judgment so you have to find out reasons why the intrument was invalid.
After considering the aforesaid submissions, it is clear that the cheque issued by the respondent was
required to be issued by President and Director of the Society. On cheque itself, a rubber seal has
been appended, in which signatures of President and Director were required. When a cheque was
issued by a person for the society, whereas the account was joint account and cheque could not
issued by a single person. The disputed cheque was not a cheque in the eye of law under Section 6 of
the M.Cr.C.No.474/2013 Negotiable Instruments Act (In short "NI Act"). When there is a joint
account and cheque is to be issued by joint signatures then, cheque issued by a single person is not
an authorization as required under Section 6 of the NI Act.
Learned counsel for the applicant has invited the attention of this Court to the judgment passed by
Apex Court in case of "Laxmi Dyechem Vs. State of Gujarat and others", [(2012) 13 SCC 375] . He
has invited the attention of this Court to para 15 and onwards, in which Hon'ble the Apex Court has
held about the various conditions relating to issuance of cheque. However, the factual position of
that case is not same as of the present case. When cheque is to be issued by two persons and it is not
issued by two persons then, such a situation is not considered in that case. Hence, law laid by
Hon'ble the Apex Court in case of Laxmi Dyechem (supra) cannot be applied in the present case.
The trial Court has rightly acquitted the respondent. If cheque was required to be issued by two
persons and it was issued with signature of one person then, certainly the applicant can be
prosecuted for offence of cheating but, no offence under Section 138 of NI Act is made out against