Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
RAVI V.HOSMANI
Safiya W/o Abdul Rehaman – Appellant
Versus
M. Hameed S/o Mohiddin Byari – Respondent
ORDER :
1. Challenging judgment dated 23.09.2023 passed by Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chikkamagaluru, in Crl.A.no.101/2023 confirming judgment dated 29.04.2023 passed by Civil Judge & JMFC, NR Pura, in CC no.276/2020, this revision petition is filed.
2. Sri Pavankumar Y Dhongde, learned counsel for petitioner submitted this revision petition was against concurrent erroneous findings convicting accused for offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 ('NI Act' for short).
3. It was submitted, proceedings were initiated on a private complaint filed by complainant under Section 200 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ('CrPC' for short) stating that accused was his relative and in first week of January, 2020, borrowed Rs.4,30,000/- as hand-loan agreeing to repay within three months, and on demand accused issued cheque bearing no.281951 dated 07.10.2020 for Rs.4,30,000/- drawn on Canara Bank, Anandapura, which when presented was dishonored with endorsement ‘funds insufficient and drawer signature incomplete’. And thereafter, even when demand notice got issued by complainant on 09.10.2020 was served, accused failed to repay amount within time and ther
To convict under Section 138 of the NI Act, it is essential to establish the signature and due execution of the cheque, with the burden resting on the accused to disprove after admission.
The omission of particulars in lending does not negate a conviction for dishonor of a cheque if sufficient evidence of issuance exists; excessive interest imposition may be modified.
The burden to prove financial capability lies on the complainant when the accused raises a probable defense, not requiring proof beyond reasonable doubt.
When a complainant discharges their initial burden under Sections 138 and 139 of N.I. Act, presumptions in their favor come into play, which can be rebutted by preponderance of probabilities.
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....
To establish an offense under Section 138 of NI Act, there must be a subsisting account at the time of issuing or presenting the cheque, and burden lies on complainant to prove due execution when exe....
A complainant must prove the execution of a cheque by direct knowledge or witness testimony; reliance solely on records fails to establish the burden of proof.
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
