As per case facts, Sunaina Chauhan and Rakesh Chauhan were convicted for dishonour of cheques issued as repayment for a loan from Sanjeev Chugh. They appealed to the Additional Sessions ... Judge, who upheld the conviction but enhanced the sentence and compensation. The High Court previously remanded the cases for fresh hearing as judgments were passed in the accused's absence. The revisionists challenged the maintainability of separate complaints, the liability of Rakesh Chauhan, and the excessive sentence enhancements. The complainant sought further enhancement of imprisonment and compensation. The question arose whether filing two separate complaints for cheques arising from a single transaction was maintainable, whether Rakesh Chauhan, as a co-signer for his wife's debt, was culpable under the Negotiable Instruments Act, and if the enhanced sentences and compensation by the Additional Sessions Judge were proportionate and justified. Finally, the Court held that separate complaints were maintainable due to distinct cheque drawers and varying liabilities, as each dishonoured cheque constitutes a separate offense even from a common transaction. It affirmed Rakesh Chauhan's liability, stating that by issuing cheques for his wife's debt, he consciously assumed the obligation, and mere claims of security cheques or no personal debt were insufficient to rebut the statutory presumption, especially with admitted signatures. While upholding the conviction and the enhanced compensation to offset the prolonged financial loss to the complainant, the Court found no further enhancement in the imprisonment term necessary, considering the protracted nature of proceedings. The sentences of imprisonment for Sunaina Chauhan were directed to run concurrently.