SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Kar) 956

J.M.KHAZI
Murtuja – Appellant
Versus
Zakeer – Respondent


JUDGMENT :

1. Being aggrieved by the dismissal of complaint filed under Sec. 200 of Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C.' for short), 1973, for the offence punishable under Sec. 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as 'N.I.Act' for short), 1881, against the accused, complainant has filed this appeal under Sec. 378(4) of Cr.P.C.

2. After due service of notice, respondent has appeared through counsel.

3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to their ranks before the Trial Court.

4. It is the case of the complainant that he is a business man whereas accused is a Government teacher. They are close friends since for the last few years. In the month of April-2014, accused approached complainant with a request to advance a sum of Rs.5,10,000.00 by way of hand loan to meet his urgent family necessity. Since complainant is having complete trust in the accused and to over come his difficulty, he extended hand loan of Rs.5,10,000.00 to the accused. Accused promise to repay the same within six months.

5. It is further case of the complainant that after six months when accused did not choose to repay the amount, on his repeated reques

        Click Here to Read the rest of this document
        1
        2
        3
        4
        5
        6
        7
        8
        9
        10
        11
        Judicial Analysis

        [None identified. No cases contain keywords or phrases indicating they have been overruled, reversed, abrogated, criticized, or questioned. All appear to articulate valid principles without negative treatment indicators.]

        Kishan Rao VS Shankargouda - 2018 6 Supreme 570: Articulates affirmative principles on High Court's limited role and rebuttable presumption u/s 139; no negative treatment keywords present. Phrases like "High Court cannot substitute its views" and "presumption...is rebuttable" indicate established doctrine without subsequent disapproval.

        Krishna Janardhan Bhat VS Dattatraya G. Hegde - 2008 1 Supreme 306: Emphasizes "important principles of legal jurisprudence" including presumption of innocence and balancing reverse burden u/s 139; language such as "important point" signals positive endorsement and relevance, with no contrary treatment.

        Rangappa VS Sri Mohan - 2010 4 Supreme 169: Clearly states standards of proof for rebutting presumption u/s 139 ("preponderance of probabilities") and affirms presumption includes enforceable debt; numbered holdings suggest authoritative principles, lacking any negative treatment indicators.

        [None. All cases provide clear affirmative statements of legal principles related to Section 139 NI Act without ambiguous or conflicting treatment language. No speculation needed; categorization based solely on absence of negative keywords and presence of doctrinal affirmations.]

        SupremeToday Portrait Ad
        supreme today icon
        logo-black

        An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

        Please visit our Training & Support
        Center or Contact Us for assistance

        qr

        Scan Me!

        India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

        For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

        whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
        whatsapp-icon Back to top