{"id":176,"date":"2022-08-17T09:00:00","date_gmt":"2022-08-17T09:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/utuhukuk.com\/karsiliksiz-cek-kesidecisinin-cezai-sorumlulugu\/"},"modified":"2026-09-29T16:27:46","modified_gmt":"2026-09-29T16:27:46","slug":"criminal-liability-drawer-dishonoured-cheque","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/utuhukuk.com\/en\/karsiliksiz-cek-kesidecisinin-cezai-sorumlulugu\/","title":{"rendered":"Criminal Liability of the Drawer of a Dishonoured Cheque"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"pm\" data-utu-pm=\"1\">\n<p class=\"pm-giris\"><strong>Bad cheque<\/strong> issuance has been subjected to different sanctions in different periods through amendments to the Cheque Law. In this study we will attempt to address the offence of issuing a bad cheque comparatively within the framework of Cheque Law No. 5941 as amended by Law No. 6273 and Cheque Law No. 5941 as amended by Law No. 6728. The elements of the offence, the person liable, the sanctions, the right of complaint and the competent court with subject-matter and territorial jurisdiction are examined below under separate headings.<\/p>\n<aside class=\"pm-ozet\" aria-label=\"In brief\">\n<p class=\"pm-etiket\">In brief<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>The article examines the offence of issuing a bounced (dishonoured) cheque comparatively within the framework of Cheque Law No. 5941 as amended by Laws No. 6273 and 6728.<\/li>\n<li>For the offence to be committed, the instrument must have the nature of a cheque, must be presented by the legitimate holder within the statutory presentation period calculated from the date of issue, and must lack sufficient funds at presentation.<\/li>\n<li>The 'dishonoured' (kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131ks\u0131zd\u0131r) procedure depends on the holder's request; if the holder does not have it carried out, no offence arises. The offence is subject to complaint, and the right of complaint belongs to the legitimate holder.<\/li>\n<li>Under the provision as amended by Law No. 6728, a judicial fine of up to one thousand five hundred days is imposed for each cheque; the fine may not be less than the unpaid amount of the cheque.<\/li>\n<li>The court also imposes a prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts; an unpaid judicial fine is converted directly into imprisonment without an order for community service.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/aside>\n<div class=\"pm-not\">\n<p class=\"pm-etiket\">Currency note<\/p>\n<p>This article was prepared in accordance with the legislation and practice in force on the date of its publication. The article was written on the basis of the Cheque Law provisions of the 2016-2017 period; the transitional provisions, the provisions on judicial fines and the prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts, and the related practice may have changed since then. You are advised to consult a lawyer regarding the current position.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<details class=\"pm-ic\" open>\n<summary>Contents<\/summary>\n<ol>\n<li><a href=\"#yasal-gelisim\">Legislative development of the sanctions<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#unsurlar-senet\">Elements: cheque status and timely presentment<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#unsurlar-hamil\">Elements: legitimate holder, funds and the dishonour notation<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#sorumlu\">The offence and the person liable<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#adli-para-cezasi\">Sanction: judicial fine<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#yasak\">Prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#sikayet\">Right of complaint, time limit and withdrawal<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#mahkeme\">Competent court and venue<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#sonuc\">Conclusion and assessment<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#kaynakca\">Bibliography<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#sss\">Frequently asked questions<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#iletisim\">Consultation request<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/details>\n<section id=\"yasal-gelisim\">\n<h2>Legislative Development of the Sanctions for Bad Cheques<\/h2>\n<p>The legislation governing the sanctions applicable to the act\/offence of issuing a dishonoured cheque is as follows;<\/p>\n<p>The sanction for the dishonoured cheque offence is set out in Article 16 of the former Cheque Law (E\u00c7K) <em>\u201cWithout prejudice to cases which the laws separately define as offences, they shall be punished with a heavy fine equal to the amount of the cheque. However, the fine to be imposed may not exceed eighty billion lira. \u2026 Repeat offenders of this offence shall be sentenced to imprisonment of one to five years.\u201d<\/em> as provided above.<\/p>\n<p>Article 5 of Cheque Law No. 5941 (\u00c7K), as amended by Law No. 6273, provides <em>\u201c\u2026 where a cheque is marked as dishonoured, upon the request of the holder made within six months, a decision prohibiting the issuing of cheques and the opening of cheque accounts shall be issued, in respect of each cheque, against the real or legal person holding the cheque account by the public prosecutor of the place where the bank branch at which the cheque was presented for collection or at which the cheque account was opened is located, or of the place of residence of the cheque account holder or of the requesting party.\u201d <\/em>as provided above.<\/p>\n<p>Article 5 of Cheque Law No. 5941 (\u00c7K), as amended by Law No. 6728, provides <em>\u201c\u2026a judicial fine of up to one thousand five hundred days shall be imposed in respect of each cheque. However, the judicial fine to be imposed may not be less than the unpaid amount of the cheque (\u2026)(2). The court shall also order a prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts or, where such a prohibition already exists, its continuation.\u201d <\/em>as stated above.<\/p>\n<p>The sanctions attached to the act of issuing a bad cheque by the three regulations are compared below:<\/p>\n<p class=\"pm-tablo-baslik\" id=\"tablo-gelisim\">Sanctions provided for the act of issuing a bad cheque<\/p>\n<div class=\"pm-tablo-kap\">\n<table class=\"pm-tablo\" aria-labelledby=\"tablo-gelisim\">\n<thead>\n<tr>\n<th scope=\"col\">Provision<\/th>\n<th scope=\"col\">Sanction provided for<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<th scope=\"row\">Former Cheque Law No. 3167 (Former CL Art. 16)<\/th>\n<td>A heavy fine equal to the amount of the cheque; imprisonment from one to five years for repeat offenders<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<th scope=\"row\">Cheque Law No. 5941 as amended by Law No. 6273, Art. 5<\/th>\n<td>Criminal liability abolished; prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts in the nature of an administrative sanction<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<th scope=\"row\">Cheque Law No. 5941 as amended by Law No. 6728, Art. 5<\/th>\n<td>A judicial fine of up to one thousand five hundred days for each cheque; in addition, a prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n<p>In the light of the legislation set out above, it is understood that the former Cheque Law (E\u00c7K) provides for heavier sanctions in the case of repeat offending. Among the legislative amendments, Cheque Law No. 5941 as amended by Law No. 6273, which provides for a prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts as an administrative sanction for the act of issuing a dishonoured cheque, is understood to be the provision most favourable to the offender.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"unsurlar-senet\">\n<h2>Elements of the Offence: Cheque Status and Timely Presentment<\/h2>\n<p>The article examines the following elements required for the offence of issuing a bad cheque to arise:<\/p>\n<ol class=\"pm-sirali\">\n<li>An instrument that formally qualifies as a cheque<\/li>\n<li>Timely presentment of the cheque in accordance with its issue date<\/li>\n<li>Presentment of the cheque by the legitimate holder<\/li>\n<li>Absence of funds for the cheque at the time of presentment<\/li>\n<li>The holder\u2019s request for a dishonour notation on the cheque and due establishment of the situation<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<h3>An Instrument That Formally Qualifies as a Cheque<\/h3>\n<p>For the dishonoured cheque offence to arise, the instrument presented to the bank must first of all qualify as a cheque.2 Article 780 of the Turkish Commercial Code (TTK) sets out the elements that a cheque must contain. For an instrument to qualify as a cheque, it must contain the mandatory and alternative mandatory elements specified in Article 780 of the TTK.3<\/p>\n<p>Accordingly, for the dishonoured cheque offence to arise, the instrument presented to the bank must contain the mandatory elements specified in the TTK and the Cheque Law (Article 2\/9 \u00c7K).4<\/p>\n<p>Under Article 780 of the TTK, headed \u201c<em>elements<\/em>\u201d, for an instrument to be deemed a cheque;<\/p>\n<ul class=\"pm-liste\">\n<li>The word cheque, in Turkish or in a foreign language, within the instrument<\/li>\n<li>An unconditional order to pay a specified sum<\/li>\n<li>The trade name of the payer<\/li>\n<li>The place of payment<\/li>\n<li>The date and place of issue<\/li>\n<li>The signature of the drawer<\/li>\n<li>The serial number assigned by the bank<\/li>\n<li>The QR code<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>it must contain all of these elements and one of the alternative elements set out in paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article 781 TTK. An instrument which does not contain one of the listed mandatory and alternative elements is not a cheque (Article 781\/1 TTK).5 By the amendment made by Law No. 6728, the serial number assigned by the bank and the QR code were added to the mandatory elements that a cheque must contain. However, by the provision introduced into Article 781\/4 of the TTK by the same law, it is stated that the absence of a bank serial number and QR code on cheques printed in foreign countries shall not affect the validity of the cheque.<\/p>\n<p>In addition, Articles 2\/6 and 2\/7 of the Cheque Law, which are special provisions, regulate certain elements that a cheque must contain. However, since these elements concern only the banks opening cheque accounts, their absence does not render the cheque invalid (Article 2\/9 \u00c7K). Just as the absence of the elements that a cheque must contain, the addition to a cheque of an element which is not permissible also results in the loss of its status as a cheque. By way of example, if it is written on the cheque that payment is conditional upon delivery of goods, the instrument loses its status as a cheque, since it no longer contains an unconditional order to pay a specific &#8216;sum.6 Likewise, the absence of the drawer\u2019s signature or of the word \u201ccheque\u201d also prevents the instrument from being a cheque.<\/p>\n<h3>Timely Presentment of the Cheque in Accordance with Its Issue Date<\/h3>\n<p>As an element of the act of issuing a dishonoured cheque, the cheque must be presented within the statutory presentation period. The act of issuing a dishonoured cheque does not arise in respect of cheques marked as dishonoured by the drawee bank after the statutory presentation period has expired.7 The relevant provision of the Cheque Law reads as follows<em>. \u201cWhere the amount of a cheque presented before the date of issue written on it has not been paid in whole or in part pursuant to Article 707 of the Turkish Commercial Code, no legal proceedings may be brought in respect of that cheque. For legal proceedings to be brought in respect of a post-dated cheque, the cheque must be presented to the bank within the statutory presentation period calculated according to the date of issue on the cheque and must be marked as dishonoured.\u201d<\/em> Provisional Article 3\/5 of the same law also provides; <em>\u201cUntil 31\/12\/2017, the presentation of a cheque to the drawee bank for payment before the date of issue written on it shall be invalid.\u201d<\/em> in legal terminology.<\/p>\n<p>In view of the statutory regulations, for the offence of issuing a bad cheque to arise, the cheque must be presented within the statutory presentment period calculated from the issue date written on the cheque.<\/p>\n<div class=\"pm-not\">\n<p class=\"pm-etiket\">Important \u00b7 Timely presentment<\/p>\n<p>Even if a dishonour notation has been made in respect of cheques not presented in time, the offence of issuing a bad cheque does not arise on account of these cheques, and the sanctions provided for the offence cannot be applied.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"unsurlar-hamil\">\n<h2>Legitimate Holder, Absence of Funds and the Dishonour Notation<\/h2>\n<h3>Presentment of the Cheque by the Legitimate Holder<\/h3>\n<p>For the offence of issuing a dishonoured cheque to arise, the cheque must be presented within the statutory presentation period calculated according to its date of issue by the \u201c<em>lawful holder<\/em>\u201d. The lawful holder of a cheque is determined in accordance with Articles 646 and 790 TTK. This also applies where the cheque is presented at a clearing house.8 The bank official is obliged to examine the chain of endorsements on the cheque, if any, and to investigate with due care and diligence whether the person appearing as the lawful holder on the cheque and the person presenting it are one and the same. Where the chain of endorsements is defective or the cheque has not been presented by the lawful holder, the drawee bank may not mark the cheque as dishonoured.9 Since the offence of issuing a dishonoured cheque does not arise where the cheque cannot be marked as dishonoured, the related sanctions cannot be applied either.<\/p>\n<h3>Absence of Funds for the Cheque at the Time of Presentment<\/h3>\n<p>Another element of the offence of issuing a dishonoured cheque is the absence of funds in the bank account covering the cheque at the time of its presentation. The lack of funds covering the cheque at the drawee bank may result from various causes. The most common is that there is no money, or only a negligible amount, in the bank account. Likewise, even if the drawer has a sufficient amount to cover the cheque in another account at the same bank, or even at the same branch, but not in the cheque account, the offence of issuing a dishonoured cheque will arise since there are no funds covering the cheque in the cheque account. However, if the bank is given authority to transfer, or instructions on this matter, so that the cheque amount is covered by money held in another account, the offence of drawing a dishonoured cheque does not arise.10 Similarly, where the cheque cannot be paid because the cheque account is pledged or attached despite there being sufficient money in it, the offence of issuing a dishonoured cheque also arises.11<\/p>\n<h3>Request for a Dishonour Notation and Due Establishment<\/h3>\n<p>The final element of the offence of issuing a dishonoured cheque is that, where the funds covering the cheque amount are not available at the bank at the time of presentation, the authorised holder of the cheque requests that the cheque be marked as dishonoured. Since marking the cheque as dishonoured depends on the holder\u2019s request, the holder may choose not to have it done. If the holder does not have the cheque marked as dishonoured, the offence of issuing a dishonoured cheque naturally does not arise. The legislation on marking a cheque as dishonoured is set out in the Cheque Law as follows;<\/p>\n<blockquote class=\"pm-kanun\">\n<p><em>\u201cWhere the holder so requests, the cheque shall be marked as dishonoured by writing on the reverse of the cheque the date on which it was presented to the bank for collection, the account balance, the amount paid by the bank within the scope of its obligation and the name and surname of the real person presenting it, stating, where that person collects the amount on behalf of a legal person, that fact, and by having it signed by that person together with the bank official. The amount remaining unpaid after deduction of the amount paid by the bank shall be clearly stated. Where the holder refuses to sign, the cheque shall not be marked as dishonoured. Where the holder does not accept partial payment, including the amount which the drawee bank is obliged to pay under the third paragraph, the cheque shall be marked as dishonoured in accordance with the second paragraph; the date of presentation and the reason for non-payment shall be written on the cheque and the cheque shall be returned to the holder after obtaining the holder\u2019s signature on it; a photocopy of its front and reverse shall be kept by the bank. The same procedure under this paragraph shall also apply where there are no funds at all in the cheque account and the holder requests payment only of the amount which the drawee bank is obliged to pay under the third paragraph.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n<p><cite>(See Article 3\/4-5 \u00c7K)<\/cite><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"sorumlu\">\n<h2>The Offence and the Person Liable under Law No. 6728<\/h2>\n<p>The statutory provision in the Cheque Law on the offence of issuing a bad cheque is as follows;<\/p>\n<blockquote class=\"pm-kanun\">\n<p>\u201c<em>Upon the complaint of the holder, a judicial fine of up to one thousand five hundred days shall be imposed, in respect of each cheque, on the person who causes a cheque to be marked as \u201cdishonoured\u201d upon its presentation within the statutory presentation period calculated according to the date of issue written on it. However, the judicial fine to be imposed may not be less than the unpaid amount of the cheque (\u2026)(2). The court shall also order a prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts or, where such a prohibition already exists, its continuation. During the proceedings, the court shall also, of its own motion, order a prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts as a protective measure.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n<p><cite>(See Article 5 \u00c7K)<\/cite><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Where the cheque is presented to the bank by its authorised holder within the statutory presentation period calculated according to its date of issue, the funds covering the cheque are not available at the bank and the cheque is marked as dishonoured at the holder\u2019s request, upon the holder\u2019s complaint the drawer is punished under the Cheque Law for the offence of issuing a dishonoured cheque. The legislature has attached a sanction to the absence of funds covering the cheque.<\/p>\n<p>By the amendment made to the Cheque Law by Law No. 6273, the criminal liability of the person issuing a dishonoured cheque was abolished and it was instead provided that a prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts, in the nature of an administrative sanction, would be imposed. Considering the penalty provided for by that amendment, it is clear that the Cheque Law as amended by Law No. 6273 is more favourable to the drawer of a dishonoured cheque, that is, the person responsible for the act of issuing a dishonoured cheque.<\/p>\n<h3>The Person Liable for the Offence of Issuing a Bad Cheque<\/h3>\n<p>The person liable for the offence of issuing a dishonoured cheque is the person obliged to keep the funds covering the cheque in the relevant bank account, that is, the cheque account holder. A real person holding a cheque account may not appoint another person as representative or attorney to issue cheques on his or her behalf.<\/p>\n<div class=\"pm-ikili\">\n<div class=\"pm-kart\">\n<p class=\"pm-etiket\">Account holder is a natural person<\/p>\n<p>Where a cheque is issued as the representative or attorney of a natural person, civil and criminal liability arising from that cheque rests with the cheque account holder.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"pm-kart\">\n<p class=\"pm-etiket\">Account holder is a legal person<\/p>\n<p>Where the cheque account holder is a legal person, the member of the management body assigned to conduct the financial affairs of that legal person or, if no such designation has been made, the natural person or persons constituting the management body, are obliged to keep the funds for the cheque in the relevant bank account.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<p>Where a cheque is issued as the representative or attorney of a real person, the civil and criminal liability arising from that cheque rests with the cheque account holder. (See Article 5\/2-3 \u00c7K) In other words, even if the cheque account holder did not issue the dishonoured cheque (it having been issued by his or her attorney), the real person holding the cheque account is held criminally liable where there are no funds covering the cheque when it is presented to the bank. In the light of the statutory provision set out above, the attorney or representative issuing a cheque on behalf of a real person bears no criminal liability. Although, under the principle of individual criminal responsibility, the attorney or representative ought at least to be punished in the same way as the real person holding the cheque account, this does not appear possible under the legislation.12<\/p>\n<p>Where the cheque account holder is a legal person, the member of the management body charged with conducting the financial affairs of that legal person or, where no such designation has been made, the real person or persons constituting the management body, are obliged to keep the funds covering the cheque in the relevant bank account. (See Article 5\/2 \u00c7K) Under the Cheque Law as amended by Law No. 6728, no judicial fine is provided for against a legal person in respect of issuing a dishonoured cheque. It has been provided that, where a legal person issues a dishonoured cheque, the member of the board of directors charged with managing the financial affairs of the legal person or, where no such allocation of duties has been made within the legal person, the real person or persons constituting the board of directors, shall be criminally liable to a judicial fine. The representative or attorney of the account-holding legal person who is obliged to keep the funds covering the cheque available at the bank is held criminally liable even if he or she did not issue the dishonoured cheque.13<\/p>\n<p>A prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts shall be imposed, as a security measure, on the real or legal persons who caused a dishonoured cheque to be issued and on those who drew the cheque on behalf of the legal person. Likewise, where the dishonoured cheque is issued on behalf of a capital company, the management body and the company officers registered with the trade registry shall also be held liable and a prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts shall be imposed on them. (See Article 5\/1 \u00c7K) In the light of this statutory provision, although legal persons bear no criminal liability for the offence of drawing a dishonoured cheque, a prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts may be imposed on them as a security measure.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"adli-para-cezasi\">\n<h2>Sanction: Judicial Fine<\/h2>\n<p>Cheque Law No. 5941 as amended by Law No. 6728 provides that the person issuing a dishonoured cheque shall be punished with a judicial fine.<\/p>\n<p>The relevant provision, under the heading \u201c<em>criminal liability, prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts<\/em>\u201d, is worded as follows: \u201c<em>Upon the complaint of the holder, a judicial fine of up to one thousand five hundred days shall be imposed, in respect of each cheque, on the person who causes a cheque to be marked as \u201cdishonoured\u201d upon its presentation within the statutory presentation period calculated according to the date of issue written on it. However, the judicial fine to be imposed may not be less than the unpaid amount of the cheque (\u2026)(2).\u201d <\/em>in those terms.<\/p>\n<p>Since the text of the article sets only the upper limit of the judicial fine in terms of day units, at 1,500 days, the lower limit will be 5 days pursuant to Article 52\/1 of the Turkish Criminal Code (TCK). Under Article 52 TCK, the daily amount of the judicial fine is determined as a minimum of TRY 20 and a maximum of TRY 100, taking into account the economic and other personal circumstances of the person. Accordingly, if the conversion into a judicial fine is applied to the defendant at TRY 20 per day, a judicial fine of at least TRY 100 and at most TRY 30,000 may be imposed; if the conversion is applied at TRY 100 per day, a judicial fine of at least TRY 500 and at most TRY 150,000 may be imposed. However, since under Article 5\/1 \u00c7K the final penalty may not be less than the unpaid amount of the cheque, even if a lower penalty is imposed on the defendant, the defendant\u2019s penalty will be increased to the unpaid amount of the cheque and the final penalty will be the unpaid amount of the cheque.14 The law provides that the drawer shall be punished separately for each cheque in respect of which he or she caused it to be marked as dishonoured. Accordingly, where the drawer gives more than one cheque to the same holder for the same debt and the cheques are marked as dishonoured, upon the holder\u2019s complaint a separate judicial fine will have to be imposed on the drawer in respect of each cheque left unpaid for the same debt.<\/p>\n<p class=\"pm-tablo-baslik\" id=\"tablo-apc\">Limits of the judicial fine according to the calculation in the article<\/p>\n<div class=\"pm-tablo-kap\">\n<table class=\"pm-tablo\" aria-labelledby=\"tablo-apc\">\n<thead>\n<tr>\n<th scope=\"col\"><\/th>\n<th scope=\"col\">Minimum<\/th>\n<th scope=\"col\">Maximum<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<th scope=\"row\">Day unit<\/th>\n<td>5 days<\/td>\n<td>1500 days<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<th scope=\"row\">From TRY 20 per day<\/th>\n<td>TRY 100<\/td>\n<td>30.000 TL<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<th scope=\"row\">From TRY 100 per day<\/th>\n<td>TRY 500<\/td>\n<td>TRY 150,000<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"pm-not\">\n<p class=\"pm-etiket\">Important \u00b7 The unfunded amount<\/p>\n<p>Whatever the calculated amount, the penalty imposed may not be less than the unfunded portion of the cheque amount, and it is imposed separately for each cheque.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>Whereas former Cheque Law No. 3167 provided directly for imprisonment in the case of repeat offending, Cheque Law No. 5941 as amended by Law No. 6728 does not provide for imprisonment, whether or not the offender is a repeat offender. This change made by Law No. 5941 is a consequence of the idea that an economic offence should attract an economic penalty.<\/p>\n<p>By the amendment made to Cheque Law No. 5941 by Law No. 6273, the criminal liability of the drawer of a dishonoured cheque was abolished and it was provided that only a prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts would be imposed as an administrative sanction. However, by the amendment made by Law No. 6728 in 2016, this approach was abandoned, the criminal liability of the person issuing a dishonoured cheque was reintroduced and a judicial fine was provided for as the sanction.<\/p>\n<p>Pursuant to Article 5\/10 of Cheque Law No. 5941 as amended by Law No. 6728, it is not possible to apply pre-payment (\u00f6n \u00f6deme), conciliation (uzla\u015fma) or deferral of the announcement of the verdict (HAGB) in respect of the offence of issuing a dishonoured cheque. Furthermore, pursuant to paragraph 5\/11 \u00c7K, where the judicial fine imposed on the drawer of a dishonoured cheque is not paid, it cannot be converted into community service under Article 106 of Law No. 5275 on the Execution of Sentences and Security Measures. It is provided that, where the drawer of a dishonoured cheque fails to pay the judicial fine, the judicial fine imposed shall be converted directly into imprisonment. The statutory provision on this matter reads \u201c<em>The provisions on pre-payment, conciliation and deferral of the announcement of the verdict shall not apply in respect of the offence defined in the first paragraph. Where the judicial fines imposed under the first paragraph are not paid, such fines shall be converted directly into imprisonment without an order for community service under the third paragraph of Article 106 of Law No. 5275 on the Execution of Sentences and Security Measures dated 13\/12\/2004.<\/em>\u201d. (See Article 5\/10-11 \u00c7K)<\/p>\n<p>Accordingly, the following institutions do not apply to the offence of issuing a bad cheque:<\/p>\n<ul class=\"pm-cipler\" aria-label=\"Institutions not applicable to the offence of issuing a bad cheque\">\n<li>Prepayment<\/li>\n<li>Conciliation<\/li>\n<li>Deferral of the announcement of the verdict<\/li>\n<li>Community service<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"yasak\">\n<h2>Prohibition on Issuing Cheques and Opening Cheque Accounts<\/h2>\n<p>Cheque Law No. 5941 as amended by Law No. 6728 provides that, in addition to the judicial fine, a prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts shall be imposed on the person issuing a dishonoured cheque as a security measure.<\/p>\n<p>The relevant provision, under the heading \u201c<em>criminal liability, prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts<\/em>\u201d, is worded as follows: \u201c <em>The court shall also order a prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts or, where such a prohibition already exists, its continuation. During the proceedings, the court shall also, of its own motion, order a prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts as a protective measure. The prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts shall apply to the real or legal person holding the cheque account, to those who draw cheques on behalf of that legal person and, where the dishonoured cheque is issued on behalf of a capital company, also to the management body and the company officers registered with the trade registry.<\/em>\u201d as provided above.<\/p>\n<p>Under the new provision introduced by Law No. 6728, the prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts will now also be imposed by the court of its own motion as a protective measure during the proceedings. (See Article 5\/1 \u00c7K) Likewise, it is provided that, at the end of the proceedings, the court shall order a prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts against the person liable for the offence of issuing a dishonoured cheque or, where such a prohibition already exists, its continuation. Furthermore, a prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts may also be imposed on a legal person.<\/p>\n<p>It is provided that, where a prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts is imposed, the decision shall be served on the person concerned.16 A person subject to a prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts is obliged to return all cheque leaves in his or her possession to the banks to which they belong. No new cheque account may be opened in that person\u2019s name. A person subject to a prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts is obliged, within ten days of the date on which the decision is served on him or her, to provide the drawee bank with a list of the cheques he or she has issued whose amounts have not yet been collected, stating their dates of issue, amounts and payees, if any. (Article 5\/6-7 \u00c7K)<\/p>\n<p>The process following the prohibition decision is as follows, in the order described in the article:<\/p>\n<ol class=\"pm-adimlar\">\n<li><strong>Service of the decision<\/strong><span>The decision prohibiting the issuing of cheques and the opening of cheque accounts is served on the person concerned.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><strong>Return of cheque leaves<\/strong><span>The person returns all the cheque leaves in their possession to the banks to which they belong.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><strong>Submission of a list<\/strong><span>Within ten days of service, the cheques whose amounts have not yet been collected are submitted to the drawee bank in the form of a list.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><strong>No new account may be opened<\/strong><span>No new cheque account may be opened in the name of this person.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<div class=\"pm-not\">\n<p class=\"pm-etiket\">Sanction for breach of the prohibition<\/p>\n<p>A person subject to a prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts who nevertheless issues a cheque shall be punished with imprisonment of one to three years, unless the act constitutes another offence requiring a heavier penalty. (Article 7\/6 \u00c7K)<\/p>\n<p>No new cheque account may be opened in the name of a person subject to a prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts. Where such an account is opened, the bank official who opened it shall be punished with imprisonment of three months to one year (Article 7\/7 \u00c7K).<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>Although Article 5 of Law No. 5941 as amended by Law No. 6728 provides that a prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts shall be imposed on the person liable in respect of each dishonoured cheque, no provision has been made regarding the duration of the measure.17 However, under Article 6 of the Law, headed \u201cEffective remorse and lifting of the prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts\u201d, where the person liable pays in full the unpaid cheque amount adjudged against him or her, together with interest calculated at the default interest rate for commercial transactions under Law No. 3095 running from the statutory presentation date determined according to the date of issue written on the cheque, the court will decide to discontinue the case during the proceedings or, after the conviction has become final, to set aside the judgment with all its consequences; accordingly, the prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts imposed on the person liable will also be lifted. The text of the Law also provides that the prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts will be lifted where the holder withdraws the complaint. In the light of the statutory provisions cited above, the prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts imposed on the person liable remains in force until it comes to an end, in other words until it is lifted, under the conditions set out above.<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, it is provided that the person may, after 3 years have elapsed from the date on which the sentence imposed was fully executed and in any event after 10 years have elapsed from the date on which the prohibition was imposed, apply to the court that rendered the judgment for the lifting of the prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts, and may object to the decision rendered.18 Likewise, where, following proceedings concerning a dishonoured cheque, the court renders a decision of acquittal, no penalty, discontinuance or dismissal of the case, it shall in the same decision order the lifting of the prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts. (Article 5\/9 \u00c7K)<\/p>\n<p>The article lists the cases in which the prohibition ceases or may be lifted as follows:<\/p>\n<ul class=\"pm-liste\">\n<li>Payment in full of the unfunded cheque amount together with its interest<\/li>\n<li>Withdrawal of the complaint by the holder<\/li>\n<li>A request for its lifting after 3 years have elapsed from the date on which the penalty was fully executed and, in any event, after 10 years from the date on which the prohibition was imposed<\/li>\n<li>A decision of acquittal, of no penalty, of discontinuance of the case or of dismissal of the case<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Information on the decision imposing a prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts shall, after being signed with a secure electronic signature, be notified electronically to MERS\u0130S (the Central Registry Record System) and to the Risk Centre via the Ministry of Justice\u2019s National Judiciary Informatics System (UYAP). Persons subject to a prohibition on opening cheque accounts are notified to banks by the Risk Centre. The principles and procedures for these notifications and for announcements to be made to banks are determined by the Risk Centre upon the favourable opinion of the Ministry of Justice. (Article 5\/8 \u00c7K)<\/p>\n<p>Since the criminal liability of the drawer was abolished under Cheque Law No. 5941 as amended by Law No. 6273, only a prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts, in the nature of an administrative sanction, was imposed on the person liable. However, this approach was abandoned by the amendment made in 2016.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"sikayet\">\n<h2>Right of Complaint, Time Limit for Complaint and Withdrawal<\/h2>\n<p>The offence of issuing a dishonoured cheque is an offence prosecuted upon complaint. For the offence to arise, the holder must present the cheque to the bank within the statutory presentation period calculated according to its date of issue and must file a complaint after the bank has marked the cheque as dishonoured owing to the absence of funds covering it. This is expressed in the Law <em>\u201c\u2026upon the complaint of the holder, a judicial fine of up to one thousand five hundred days shall be imposed in respect of each cheque.\u201d<\/em> in these terms. As stated above, the right to file a complaint belongs to the lawful holder of the cheque.<\/p>\n<p>The person entitled to file a complaint in respect of the offence of &#8220;causing a cheque to be marked as dishonoured (kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131ks\u0131zd\u0131r) within the statutory presentment period calculated from the date of issue written on it&#8221;, regulated in Article 5\/1 of Law No. 5941 as amended by Law No. 6728, is the natural person who presents the cheque to the bank for collection of its amount. This person may also carry out this transaction on behalf of a legal entity. However, this must be stated and recorded at the time the dishonour (kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131ks\u0131zd\u0131r) procedure is carried out. Law No. 5941 as amended by Law No. 6728 does not grant a right of complaint to the endorser or to a bank holding the cheque by virtue of a statutory or contractual security. The reason why the right of complaint belongs to the holder who presented the cheque and had it marked as dishonoured is that this person is the victim of the offence, and the rule under criminal law that the right of complaint, being strictly personal, cannot be transferred or assigned.19<\/p>\n<div class=\"pm-ikili\">\n<div class=\"pm-kart\">\n<p class=\"pm-etiket\">Has the right of complaint<\/p>\n<p>The natural person who presents the cheque to the bank for collection of its amount; this person may also carry out the transaction on behalf of a legal person.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"pm-kart\">\n<p class=\"pm-etiket\">Not granted the right of complaint<\/p>\n<p>The endorser, and a bank holding the cheque by reason of a statutory or contractual security.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"pm-not\">\n<p class=\"pm-etiket\">Date of the offence<\/p>\n<p>In the offence of drawing a dishonoured cheque, the date of the offence is the date on which the cheque is presented to the bank; the date on which the cheque was drawn cannot be accepted as the date of the offence.20<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>Cheque Law No. 5941 as amended by Law No. 6728 does not expressly regulate the holder\u2019s complaint period; this matter is addressed by way of cross-reference. The Law provides: \u201c <em>Cases brought in respect of this offence shall be heard by the enforcement court, and the provisions on procedure set out in Articles 347, 349, 350, 351, 352 and 353 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law shall apply<\/em>.\u201d (See Article 5\/1 \u00c7K)<\/p>\n<p>The provision on the holder\u2019s complaint period is set out in Article 347 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law (\u0130\u0130K), under the heading \u201ccomplaint period\u201d, as follows: \u201c<em>The right to file a complaint in respect of the acts set out in this Chapter shall lapse upon the expiry of three months from the date on which the act became known and, in any event, of one year from the date on which the act was committed<\/em>.\u201d In the light of the statutory provisions, the holder\u2019s complaint period, for each cheque, is 3 months from the date on which, following presentation to the bank within the statutory presentation period calculated according to the date of issue, the bank marked the cheque as dishonoured owing to the absence of funds covering it. Since, under the Cheque Law, the presentation of post-dated cheques to the bank before 31\/12\/2017 is not valid,21 the commencement of the right to file a complaint and the commencement of the complaint period (the date on which the act complained of became known) will fall on the same date.<\/p>\n<blockquote class=\"pm-kanun\">\n<p>\u201cThe right of complaint in respect of the acts set out in this Part shall lapse upon the expiry of three months from the date on which the act became known and, in any event, one year from the date on which the act was committed.\u201d<\/p>\n<p><cite>EBL Art. 347<\/cite><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Since the complaint period was not expressly regulated in the original version of Law No. 5941, the period was determined as 6 months under Article 73 TCK. The legislature subsequently, by the amendment made by Law No. 6273, expressly regulated the complaint period for the act of issuing a dishonoured cheque (an administrative sanction) and set it at 6 months.<\/p>\n<p>The right to file a complaint must be exercised by the holder by way of a petition or an oral statement made to the enforcement court.23<\/p>\n<p>Pursuant to paragraph 6\/2 of the Cheque Law, the holder has the right to withdraw the complaint. If the holder withdraws the complaint during the proceedings, the court decides to discontinue the case; if the complaint is withdrawn after the conviction has become final, the court decides to set aside the judgment with all its consequences. (See Article 6\/2 \u00c7K)<\/p>\n<p>The right to withdraw the complaint belongs to the person who holds and has exercised the right to file the complaint (the lawful holder). In the case of legal persons, the person entitled to file the complaint also has the power to withdraw it. Since the Court of Cassation has also accepted that the right to file a complaint passes to heirs, withdrawal may also be exercised by the heirs.(24)<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"mahkeme\">\n<h2>Competent Court and Venue<\/h2>\n<div class=\"pm-ikili\">\n<div class=\"pm-kart\">\n<p class=\"pm-etiket\">Court with subject-matter jurisdiction \u00b7 CL Art. 5\/1<\/p>\n<p>Enforcement criminal courts<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"pm-kart\">\n<p class=\"pm-etiket\">Court with territorial jurisdiction \u00b7 CL Art. 5\/1<\/p>\n<p>The place where the cheque was presented, the place where the bank branch is located, or the domicile of the account holder or the complainant<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<p>The enforcement criminal courts have jurisdiction over proceedings concerning the offence of issuing a dishonoured cheque. This is stated in the first paragraph of Article 5 of the Cheque Law as amended by Law No. 6728 <em>\u201cCases brought in respect of this offence shall be heard by the enforcement court.\u201d<\/em> in these words.<\/p>\n<p>However, objections were raised on the ground that the enforcement courts lacked jurisdiction, stating that by Article 62 of Law No. 6728 the phrase &#8220;upon request to the Chief Public Prosecutor\u2019s Office&#8221; in paragraph 6 of Article 3 of Law No. 5941 had been amended to &#8220;upon complaint to the enforcement court&#8221;, that the commencement provision stipulated that the article in question would enter into force on 31\/12\/2017, and that until that date complaints concerning the offence of issuing a bad cheque had to be made to the Chief Public Prosecutor\u2019s Office; this issue caused uncertainty in practice. However, the Regional Courts of Appeal and the Court of Cassation rejected these objections on the ground that the provision in paragraph 6 of Article 3 of Law No. 5941 concerned the making of a dishonour notation on cheques and not the rules of procedure, and stated that the enforcement criminal courts have jurisdiction from the date on which Law No. 6728 entered into force. This point was set out as follows in the decision of the Istanbul Regional Court of Appeal, 15th Criminal Chamber, E. 1102\/2017, K. 892\/2017.<\/p>\n<blockquote class=\"pm-kanun\">\n<p>\u201c<em>Paragraph 5\/1 of Law No. 5941, headed &#8220;Criminal liability, prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts&#8221;, as amended by Article 63 of Law No. 6728 on Amendments to Certain Laws for the Improvement of the Investment Environment, which entered into force upon its publication in the Official Gazette No. 29796 dated 09\/08\/2016, regulates the offence of issuing a dishonoured cheque, and the remainder of the article provides that<\/em> a<em>cases brought in respect of this offence shall be heard by the enforcement court and that the provisions on procedure set out in Articles 347, 349, 350, 351, 352 and 353 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law shall apply. This article entered into force on 9.8.2016, the date of publication of the law. <\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>By Article 62 of Law No. 6728, which will enter into force on 31.12.2017, the expression \u201cupon request to the Chief Public Prosecutor&#8217;s Office\u201d in paragraph six of Article 3 of Law No. 5941 has been changed to \u201cupon complaint to the enforcement court\u201d, and paragraph 6 of Article 3 reads: &#8220;In the event of partial payment, including the amount that the drawee bank is obliged to pay under the third paragraph, a certified photocopy of the front and back of the cheque shall be given to the holder free of charge. With this photocopy, the cheque holder may have recourse against the parties liable on recourse or resort to the enforcement procedures relating to bills of exchange, and may attach this photocopy to the petition when making a request to the Chief Public Prosecutor&#8217;s Office and use it as a means of proof before enforcement offices and courts. Upon the request of the court or the enforcement office, the original of the cheque shall be sent by these authorities.&#8221; <\/em><\/p>\n<p><em>Considering also the preceding paragraphs of the article, since the provision in paragraph 6 of Article 3 of Law No. 5941 concerns the marking of cheques as dishonoured and not procedure, and since Article 5\/1 of Law No. 5941 as amended by Article 63 of Law No. 6728, which entered into force on 09\/08\/2016 upon publication of the law, expressly provides that the provisions on procedure set out in Articles 347, 349, 350, 351, 352 and 353 of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Law shall apply to this offence, and that under these provisions a complaint may be lodged with the Enforcement Courts by petition\u2026<\/em>\u201d as provided above.<\/p>\n<p><cite>Istanbul Regional Court of Appeal, 15th Criminal Chamber, E. 1102\/2017, K. 892\/2017<\/cite><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The court with territorial jurisdiction over the offence of issuing a dishonoured cheque is specified in the Cheque Law as follows;<\/p>\n<ul class=\"pm-liste\">\n<li>The place where the cheque was presented to the bank for collection<\/li>\n<li>The place where the bank branch at which the cheque account was opened is located<\/li>\n<li>The domicile of the account holder<\/li>\n<li>The domicile of the complainant (holder)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>as determined above. Dishonoured cheque cases may be brought in any one of the places specified above. (See Article 5\/1 \u00c7K)<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"sonuc\">\n<h2>Conclusion and Assessment<\/h2>\n<p>The several amendments made to the Cheque Law by the legislature in Turkey in recent years may be seen as a reflection of its determination to ensure confidence and stability in commercial life. Indeed, while the criminal liability of the drawer of a dishonoured cheque was abolished by Law No. 6273 in 2012, criminal liability was reintroduced by Law No. 6728 in 2016. In our view, the introduction by Law No. 6728 of a judicial fine for the drawer of a dishonoured cheque appears more suited to the commercial and social structure of our country. This is because imposing only a prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts as an administrative sanction results in the debtor being afforded greater legal protection than the creditor. This, in turn, harms commercial life in our country and the stability and confidence within it. Moreover, the legislature has not confined itself to punishing the drawer but has also introduced two new elements that a cheque must contain in our country: a QR code and a bank serial number on every cheque leaf. Through these amendments, the aim is to place the drawer issuing a dishonoured cheque under close monitoring and to prevent dishonoured cheques from again being issued easily in commercial life.<\/p>\n<p>However, in our country, owing to the issuing of post-dated cheques, the cheque has turned from a means of payment into a credit instrument. The root cause of the dishonoured cheque problem is that post-dated cheques can be issued and that this is even guaranteed by the legislature. As a result, even without sufficient funds in their accounts, drawers can issue post-dated cheques in large numbers and, in the event of an economic fluctuation, since things do not turn out as planned, they are unable to pay the amount of the cheque and cause it to be dishonoured. Although criminal and administrative sanctions for the dishonoured cheque offence are necessary, they are not sufficient. The root of the problem must be addressed: either the practice of post-dated cheques should be brought to an end, or the civil liability of banks in respect of each dishonoured cheque leaf should be increased, so as to prevent banks from issuing cheque leaves, so to speak, irresponsibly without carrying out the necessary examination and investigation.<\/p>\n<p>The provision of a judicial fine as the sanction for the dishonoured cheque offence is a consequence of the idea that an economic offence should attract an economic penalty. However, given that the penalty is converted directly into imprisonment where the drawer fails to pay the judicial fine imposed, it cannot be said that the amendment made by Law No. 6728 has entirely abolished imprisonment for the dishonoured cheque offence.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"kaynakca\">\n<h2>Bibliography<\/h2>\n<ul class=\"pm-liste\">\n<li><strong><em>DEM\u0130R, \u015eamil : <\/em><\/strong><em>5941 Say\u0131l\u0131 \u00c7ek Kanunu&#8217;nda D\u00fczenlenen \u0130dari ve Cezai Yapt\u0131r\u0131mlar, Ankara Barosu Dergisi, Year 2013, No. 1, pp. 223-247 <\/em><\/li>\n<li><strong><em>G\u00dcNAY, Meryem\/G\u00dcNAY, Mehmet :<\/em><\/strong><em>5941 Say\u0131l\u0131 \u00c7ek Kanununa G\u00f6re Kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131ks\u0131z \u00c7ek D\u00fczenleme Su\u00e7u [The Offence of Issuing a Dishonoured Cheque under Cheque Law No. 5941], T\u00fcrkiye Adalet Akademisi Dergisi, July 2010, Year 1, Issue 2, pp. 323-346 <\/em><\/li>\n<li><strong><em>KA\u00c7AK, Nazif : <\/em><\/strong><em>\u00c7ek Kanunu \u015eerhi [Commentary on the Cheque Law], Adalet Yay\u0131nlar\u0131, First Edition, Ankara, June 2010 <\/em><\/li>\n<li><strong><em>KAYAR, \u0130smail : <\/em><\/strong><em>K\u0131ymetli Evrak Hukuku [Law of Negotiable Instruments], Detay Yay\u0131nc\u0131l\u0131k, Revised Sixth Edition, Ankara, January 2013 <\/em><\/li>\n<li><strong><em>\u00d6ZTAN, F\u0131rat : <\/em><\/strong><em>K\u0131ymetli Evrak Hukuku [Law of Negotiable Instruments], Turhan Kitapevi Yay\u0131nlar\u0131, Updated Nineteenth Edition, Ankara, August 2015 <\/em><\/li>\n<li><strong><em>\u00d6Z\u00dcLK\u00dc, Hac\u0131 Osman : <\/em><\/strong><em>5941 Say\u0131l\u0131 \u00c7ek Kanunu ve Yeni T\u00fcrk Ticaret Kanunu&#8217;na G\u00f6re Kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131ks\u0131z \u00c7ek, Master&#8217;s Thesis, Erzincan University, Institute of Social Sciences, Kayseri, July 2011 <\/em><\/li>\n<li><strong><em>PULA\u015eLI, Hasan : <\/em><\/strong><em>K\u0131ymetli Evrak Hukukunun Esaslar\u0131 [Fundamentals of the Law of Negotiable Instruments], Adalet Yay\u0131nevi Yay\u0131nlar\u0131, Expanded and Updated Third Edition, Ankara, January 2013 <\/em><\/li>\n<li><strong><em>\u00dcLGEN, H\u00fcseyin\/HELVACI, Mehmet\/KEND\u0130GELEN, Abuzer\/ KAYA, Arslan : <\/em><\/strong><em>K\u0131ymetli Evrak Hukuku [Law of Negotiable Instruments], Vedat Kitap\u00e7\u0131l\u0131k Yay\u0131nlar\u0131, Sixth (Facsimile) Printing of the Revised Third Edition, Istanbul, September 2009<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3>Digital Bibliography<\/h3>\n<ul class=\"pm-liste\">\n<li><em>For Cheque Law No. 5941, see http:\/\/www.mevzuat.gov.tr\/MevzuatMetin\/1.5.5941.pdf <\/em><\/li>\n<li><em>Turkish Commercial Code No. 6102 http:\/\/www.mevzuat.gov.tr\/MevzuatMetin\/1.5.6102.pdf <\/em><\/li>\n<li><em>uyap.gov.tr <\/em><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"sss\" class=\"pm-sss\">\n<h2>Bad Cheques: Frequently Asked Questions<\/h2>\n<details open>\n<summary>What conditions must be met for the bounced cheque offence?<\/summary>\n<div>\n<p>According to the article, the instrument must have the nature of a cheque, must be presented to the bank by the legitimate holder within the statutory presentation period calculated from the date of issue, must lack sufficient funds at the time of presentation, and the 'dishonoured' procedure must be carried out at the holder's request.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/details>\n<details>\n<summary>What penalty is imposed on a person who issues a bounced cheque?<\/summary>\n<div>\n<p>6728 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanunla de\u011fi\u015fik \u00c7ek Kanunu m.5&#8217;e g\u00f6re hamilin \u015fik\u00e2yeti \u00fczerine her bir \u00e7ek i\u00e7in binbe\u015fy\u00fcz g\u00fcne kadar adli para cezas\u0131na h\u00fckmolunur; ceza, \u00e7ek bedelinin kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131ks\u0131z kalan miktar\u0131ndan az olamaz. Mahkeme ayr\u0131ca \u00e7ek d\u00fczenleme ve \u00e7ek hesab\u0131 a\u00e7ma yasa\u011f\u0131na h\u00fckmeder.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/details>\n<details>\n<summary>What happens if a judicial fine imposed for a bounced cheque is not paid?<\/summary>\n<div>\n<p>\u00c7ek Kanunu m.5\/11&#8217;e g\u00f6re \u00f6denmeyen adli para cezas\u0131, kamuya yararl\u0131 bir i\u015fte \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131rma karar\u0131 verilmeksizin do\u011frudan hapis cezas\u0131na \u00e7evrilir. Bu su\u00e7 bak\u0131m\u0131ndan \u00f6n \u00f6deme, uzla\u015fma ve h\u00fckm\u00fcn a\u00e7\u0131klanmas\u0131n\u0131n geri b\u0131rak\u0131lmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin h\u00fck\u00fcmler de uygulanmaz.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/details>\n<details>\n<summary>What is the time limit for filing a complaint for a bounced cheque?<\/summary>\n<div>\n<p>Makalede, \u00c7ek Kanunu&#8217;nun at\u0131f yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u0130\u0130K m.347 uyar\u0131nca \u015fik\u00e2yet hakk\u0131n\u0131n fiilin \u00f6\u011frenildi\u011fi tarihten itibaren \u00fc\u00e7 ay ve her h\u00e2lde fiilin i\u015flendi\u011fi tarihten itibaren bir y\u0131l ge\u00e7mekle d\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc\u011f\u00fc belirtilmektedir.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/details>\n<details>\n<summary>Which court hears bounced cheque cases?<\/summary>\n<div>\n<p>According to the article, enforcement criminal courts have jurisdiction over cases concerning this offence. The case may be brought at the place where the cheque was presented for collection, the place where the bank branch holding the cheque account is located, or the place of residence of the account holder or of the complainant.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/details>\n<details>\n<summary>Who is held liable for a bounced cheque issued on behalf of a company?<\/summary>\n<div>\n<p>If the cheque account holder is a legal entity, the member of the management body assigned to conduct financial affairs, or, where no such assignment has been made, the natural persons forming the management body, are obliged to keep sufficient funds for the cheque. According to the article, no judicial fine is provided for the legal entity itself.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/details>\n<details>\n<summary>How is the prohibition on issuing cheques and opening cheque accounts lifted?<\/summary>\n<div>\n<p>The article states that the prohibition is lifted if the unpaid amount of the cheque is paid in full together with interest, or if the holder withdraws the complaint. Its removal may also be requested after 3 years from the enforcement of the penalty and in any event after 10 years from the imposition of the prohibition.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/details>\n<\/section>\n<section id=\"iletisim\" class=\"pm-form-kap\">\n<div class=\"pm-form-sol\">\n<p class=\"pm-etiket\">Consultation request<\/p>\n<h2>Do you have a question about a bad cheque?<\/h2>\n<p>As UTU Hukuk Dan\u0131\u015fmanl\u0131k, we provide legal and advisory services in the field of criminal law.<\/p>\n<p>Fill in the form and we will call you. You can also contact us directly:<\/p>\n<ul class=\"pm-kanal\">\n<li><a href=\"tel:+905365931600\">+90 536 593 16 00<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"mailto:bilgi@utuhukuk.com\">bilgi@utuhukuk.com<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n<form class=\"pm-form\" data-alan=\"Ceza Hukuku\" novalidate action=\"\">\n<div class=\"pm-alan\"><label for=\"pm-ad\">Full name *<\/label><input id=\"pm-ad\" name=\"ad\" type=\"text\" autocomplete=\"name\" required><\/div>\n<div class=\"pm-alan\"><label for=\"pm-tel\">Phone *<\/label><input id=\"pm-tel\" name=\"tel\" type=\"tel\" autocomplete=\"tel\" inputmode=\"tel\" required><\/div>\n<div class=\"pm-alan\"><label for=\"pm-mail\">Email<\/label><input id=\"pm-mail\" name=\"mail\" type=\"email\" autocomplete=\"email\"><\/div>\n<div class=\"pm-alan\"><label for=\"pm-konu\">Your situation in brief<\/label><textarea id=\"pm-konu\" name=\"konu\" rows=\"4\" placeholder=\"For example: The cheque I hold has been dishonoured for insufficient funds, and I would like to know when the time limit for filing a complaint expires.\"><\/textarea><\/div>\n<div class=\"pm-bal\" aria-hidden=\"true\"><label for=\"pm-web\">Website<\/label><input id=\"pm-web\" name=\"website\" type=\"text\" tabindex=\"-1\" autocomplete=\"off\"><\/div>\n<p><label class=\"pm-onay\"><input name=\"kvkk\" type=\"checkbox\" required> <span>I consent to the processing of my personal data for this request and to being contacted.<\/span><\/label><br \/>\n<button type=\"submit\">Send request<\/button><\/p>\n<p class=\"pm-durum\" role=\"status\" aria-live=\"polite\">\n<input type=\"hidden\" name=\"trp-form-language\" value=\"en\"\/><\/form>\n<\/section>\n<footer class=\"pm-imza\">\n<div class=\"pm-imza-logo\" aria-hidden=\"true\">UTU<\/div>\n<div>\n<p class=\"pm-imza-ad\">UTU Hukuk ve Dan\u0131\u015fmanl\u0131k<\/p>\n<p>Since 2016 it has been providing legal and advisory services in Ankara in many areas, labour law in particular. <a href=\"https:\/\/utuhukuk.com\/en\/criminal-law\/\">Our criminal law practice \u2192<\/a><\/p>\n<p class=\"pm-uyari\">This article is for general information only and does not constitute legal advice. You are advised to consult a lawyer about your specific situation.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/footer>\n<\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>1- General Overview The legislation governing the sanctions applicable to the act\/offence of issuing a dishonoured cheque is as follows; The sanction for the dishonoured cheque offence is set out in the former Cheque Law (E\u00c7K)\u2026<\/p>","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":393,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"elementor_canvas","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-176","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-ceza-hukuku"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/utuhukuk.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/176","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/utuhukuk.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/utuhukuk.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/utuhukuk.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/utuhukuk.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=176"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/utuhukuk.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/176\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":555,"href":"https:\/\/utuhukuk.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/176\/revisions\/555"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/utuhukuk.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/393"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/utuhukuk.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=176"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/utuhukuk.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=176"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/utuhukuk.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=176"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}