Back
H. B. PRABHAKARA SASTRY
Bharathi Dinesh Poojary – Appellant
Versus
Anil A. V. – Respondent
ORDER
1. The present petitioner as the accused was tried by the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class (V Court), Mangaluru, D.K. (hereinafter for brevity referred to as 'the Trial Court'), in Criminal Case No.1743/2014, for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter for brevity referred to as 'the N.I. Act') and was convicted for the said offence by its judgment of conviction and order on sentence dated 12-01-2017.
Aggrieved by the same, the accused preferred a Criminal Appeal, in the Court of the learned I Additional Principal District and Sessions Judge, D.K. Mangalore, (hereinafter for brevity referred to as 'the Sessions Judge's Court') in Criminal Appeal No.15/2017.
The appeal was contested by the respondent who was the complainant in the Trial Court. The Sessions Judge's Court in its judgment and order dated 11-01-2018, dismissed the appeal, confirming the judgment of conviction and order on sentence passed by the Trial Court dated 12-01-2017 in C.C.No.1743/2014.
Aggrieved by the said order, the accused has preferred this revision petition.
2. The summary of the case of the complainant in the Trial Court was that, a
The judgment emphasizes the importance of proving the loan transaction, the service of legal notice, and the failure to establish valid defenses in cases of cheque bounce under Section 138 of the N.I....
The presumption under sections 139 and 118 of the N.I. Act can establish the offense of cheque bounce, and the accused must rebut this presumption to avoid conviction.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of valid service of notice and the burden of proof regarding the financial capacity of the complainant.
Criminal Law - Dishonoured of Cheque - Appeal against conviction - Petitioner in this case, did not raise any probable defence which would create doubts in mind of Court. Court find no reason to inte....
Dishonour of cheque – By making a higher demand in a notice sent under Section 138(b) of N.I. Act, would not by itself invalidate notice provided, details of claim towards additional amounts are spec....
Once execution of a cheque is admitted, the presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act arises, and the burden shifts to the accused to rebut the existence of a legally enforceabl....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
