Breaking Supreme Court Legal Update
New Delhi · Friday, 31 July 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2024-10-21 allowed

Bijay Agarwal vs M/s Medilines

Bench: 2 — C.T. Ravikumar, Sanjay Karol

In Brief

In this criminal appeal, the Supreme Court clarified that an authorized signatory of a company cannot be treated as the 'drawer' of a cheque for purposes of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The appellant, while authorized to sign cheques on behalf of his company, faced orders to deposit 20% of fines as a condition for suspending his sentence in cheque dishonour cases under Section 138. The Court held that such deposit conditions cannot be mechanically imposed on authorized signatories, as the legal status of drawer belongs to the company itself. The primary liability for cheque dishonour rests with the company, not its officers merely because they signed the cheques. The Court allowed the appeals and quashed the deposit requirements.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Negotiable Instruments Criminal Law Company Law Cheque Dishonour Section 138 NI Act Criminal Procedure

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login