Arunachal BJP MLA, 3 others get bail in cheque bounce case

Four individuals, namely Tara Techi, Julli Techi, Raitu Techi, and P.K. Roy, convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, have been granted bail.

The convicts, who were already on bail during their trial, face a two-year sentence along with a substantial fine of Rs. 2.5 crore. However, they have not paid the compensation amount. Their inability to fulfil this financial obligation has been significant in their legal journey.

The convicts have expressed their intention to appeal the conviction. As a result, they have requested a suspension of their sentence, which has been granted by the court.

This suspension will remain in effect until 10th July 2025, provided they furnish bail bonds amounting to Rs. 50,000 each, along with one surety of the same amount. This decision allows them time to prepare for their appeal adequately.

Also Read: Arunachal BJP MLA among four jailed for 2 years in cheque bounce case

The legal representation for the convicts, led by Advocate Sh. Vivek Kumar Gupta, has been pivotal in this process. The request for bail was made to allow the defendants time to organise their appeal. The court has agreed to suspend the conviction and sentence pending this appeal, subject to the aforementioned bail conditions.

During court proceedings, the convicts' counsel highlighted the difficulty in arranging the required surety immediately. Consequently, the court has permitted the convicts to be released based on personal bonds, which were duly furnished, accepted, and attested by the court. This provision offers the convicts a temporary reprieve while they work towards meeting the court's requirements.

The court's decision mandates that the convicts must provide the required bail and surety bonds by 10th July 2025. This period provides them with the necessary time to mobilise resources for their appeal against the conviction and fines. It also underscores the court's willingness to balance justice with fairness by allowing the convicts time to comply with the legal stipulations.

This legal development is part of a broader case involving financial disputes under the Negotiable Instruments Act, which often sees extended legal proceedings due to the financial implications and penalties involved. The case highlights the intricate nature of financial litigation and the challenges faced by those embroiled in such disputes.