Back
SANJAY KUMAR JAISWAL
Virendra Kumar Bharadwaj, S/o. Shri Naresh Ram Bharadwaj – Appellant
Versus
Pundas Anchal S/o D. P. Anchal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. This acquittal appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the judgment dated 05.08.2011 Passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bilaspur (C.G.), in Complaint Case No. 11/2011 by which respondent herein has been acquitted of the charge punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881.
2. It is an undisputed fact that both parties are relatives and acquainted with each other. It is also an undisputed fact that the cheque No. 003402 of Rs.18,00,000/- (Eighteen Lakhs Only) of I.D.B.I. Bank dated 28.05.2010 was dishonoured on 09.11.2010 (Ex.-C-1). For which appellant Virendra Kumar Bharadwaj sent a legal notice (Ex.-C-5) for recovery of the said amount, but the respondent/accused has not given any reply nor given the said amount.
3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that accused Pundas Anchal borrowed Rs.18,00,000/- from the appellant for purchase of a plot. Since the accused was a relative who had cordial relations with the appellant and was a government servant therefore the appellant gave the said amount to the accused/respondent. The accused assured to return the said amount within two months but the accused did not return the said
The main legal point established in the judgment is the rebuttable nature of the presumption in favor of the holder of a cheque under Sections 118 and 139 of the N.I. Act, emphasizing the burden of p....
The burden of proof, legal presumptions, and the accused's admission of debt in the issuance of the cheque are crucial in determining liability under the Negotiable Instrument Act.
Presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act requires the accused to present credible evidence to rebut the holder's claim of legal liability regarding the cheque issued.
The presumptions under sections 138 and 139 of the NI Act favor the holder, shifting the burden to the accused to rebut the claims of liability.
The presumption of liability under the NI Act is rebuttable, and the burden of proof lies on the complainant to establish the existence of a legally enforceable debt.
A drawer of a cheque is presumed liable unless they provide evidence to rebut the presumption of issuance for debt repayment, established under Sections 138 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
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
