The Supreme Court has granted interim relief to one CK Abdurahiman, who claims he has been wrongly convicted in a cheque bounce case dating back to 1999 due to a case of mistaken identity. The top court, on June 23, 2025, admitted Abdurahiman’s appeal, suspended his sentence, and granted him bail, subject to the deposit of ₹10 lakh — half the value of the dishonoured cheque — with the Court’s registry.
The matter was heard by a Bench of Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice Joymalya Bagchi. The next hearing has been scheduled for August 12.
The case originated from a 1998 agreement to sell a rubber estate, allegedly executed between complainant Mukkath Marakkar Haji and Abdurahiman. As per the complainant’s version, a cheque of ₹20 lakh was issued in May 1999 as consideration for the sale. The cheque, drawn from an account held by one C Abdullakutty, was dishonoured in November 1999 due to insufficient funds. A legal notice was issued to Abdurahiman, who was subsequently booked for cheque dishonour under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
The Judicial First-Class Magistrate, Perinthalmanna, convicted Abdurahiman in March 2004. However, the Sessions Court later set aside the conviction in 2006. That acquittal was challenged by the complainant, leading to a reversal by the Kerala High Court in December 2024.
The High Court rejected Abdurahiman’s defence of mistaken identity, terming it “strange,” and held that sufficient material was available to conclude that CK Abdullakutty — who held the account and signed the cheque — and CK Abdurahiman were the same person. The court relied on the testimony of three bank witnesses who identified Abdurahiman as the signatory and the fact that both Abdullakutty and Abdurahiman shared the same house name.
While the High Court noted discrepancies between the cheque’s signature and a specimen bearing Abdurahiman’s signature, it observed that this was not decisive as individuals may not always replicate their signature identically. The Court ultimately convicted him but, considering the age of the case and the nature of the offence, modified the sentence to simple imprisonment till the rising of the court and directed him to pay ₹23 lakh in compensation.
In his plea before the Supreme Court, Abdurahiman reiterated that he was neither a party to the agreement nor the drawer of the dishonoured cheque, and that the account belonged to a different individual — one CK Abdullakutty.
Appearing on behalf of Abdurahiman were advocates Sriram Parakkat, Deepak Prakash, Gayathri Muraleedharan, Nachiketa Vajpayee, Divyangna Malik, Jyoti Pandey, Rahul Suresh, Shivangi Rajawat, Chetan Jadon, Parthasarthy, Ridhika, and Samridhi Srivastava.
