Back
VALMIKI MENEZES
Jerry D’Souza – Appellant
Versus
Joaquim Antonio Fernandes – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Valmiki Menezes, J.
JUDGMENT:
1. This is a Criminal Revision Application under Section 397 Cr.P.C. impugning judgment dated 08.10.2015 passed by the Sessions Court, North Goa in Criminal Appeal No.97/2014 which has dismissed the Petitioner’s appeal arising from a challenge to a judgment of conviction dated 30.06.2014 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Panaji in Criminal Case OA/33/2012/B.
2. The Respondent, who is the original Complainant instituted the aforementioned criminal case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (the Act). According to the complaint filed before the Magistrate, the Petitioner/Original Accused had taken on loan, three amounts, Rs.5,00,000/-in May, 2009, Rs.1,00,000/-in February 2010 and Rs.2,00,000/-in June, 2010; owing an amount of Rs.8,00,000/-to the Complainant, on demand. It is the Complainant’s case that the Petitioner issued to him a cheque dated 24.08.2011 for this amount, which cheque was presented by the Complainant to his Bank on 28.09.2011 when it was dishonoured, and further presented on 23.11.2011, when it was once again dishonoured under a memo issued by the Bank on the same day with the endorsement that there we
In cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the accused must provide evidence to rebut the presumption of a legally enforceable debt, which cannot be achieved through mere denial.
The presumption of debt under Section 139 N.I. Act is rebuttable; the accused must raise a probable defense regarding financial capacity to affirm the legitimacy of the cheque issued.
The presumption under Section 139 of the N.I. Act is rebuttable, and the burden lies on the accused to raise a probable defense regarding the existence of a legally enforceable debt, which must be su....
The presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is rebuttable, and the burden of proof lies on the accused to provide a probable defense.
The burden of proof on the accused to rebut the presumption under Section 139 of the NI Act and the standard of proof required.
The presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is rebuttable; the burden shifts to the complainant to prove existence of debt when the accused raises a probable defense challengi....
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
