This order is bad in law. When Hon HC says that security cheque, does not make out S.138, then hon HC cannot directly give any breaching ruling, the order of hon SC is binding on all the courts as per constitution.
It is surprising that Hon HC for the jurisdiction followed the SC order with detailed argument of its own (not required), but for security cheque it did not follow the SC order, possibly not brought to the kind attn of Hon HC.
The HC could have simply said that the said cheque being a secuirty cheque is a matter of trial, let the applicant prove at the trial. But it could not have violated SC ruling over security cheque the way it has done, by equating the security with a cheque issued for liability. Yes, it is true that security aspect is not forcefully taken up by applicant petitioner.
In my humble opinion cheques issued for loan or to financial companies should not come under the S.138, simply because they are required to keep the mortgage collateral propert.