Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
Ramesh Kumar Sisodia., S/o Sh. Balbir Singh Sisodia – Appellant
Versus
Parvesh Dabas, S/o Sh. Inderjeet Singh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. introduction of the case and loan agreement (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. evidence provided by complainant (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. challenge to convictions based on cross-examination admissions (Para 8 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. legality of cash loans under income tax law (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 5. defendant's various defenses and their validity (Para 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 6. testimony on source of loan and its proof (Para 23 , 24 , 25) |
| 7. validity of bank documents and evidence (Para 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 8. consideration of legal notices and service thereof (Para 32 , 33 , 34 , 35) |
| 9. final judgment and dismissal of the petition (Para 39 , 40) |
JUDGMENT :
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.
1. Criminal Revision Petition under Section 438 read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘B.N.S.S.’) has been filed on behalf of the Petitioner, Ramesh Kumar Sisodia (Convict) to challenge the Order dated 22.07.2025 of learned ASJ, Rohini Courts, who has upheld his Conviction dated 20.05.2023 and the Order on Sentence dated 12.12.2023 of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi, under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as ‘N.I.
The accused's burden to disprove receipt of loan under Section 138 N.I. Act must be established with cogent evidence, citing precedents on proof of debt and the validity of cash transactions.
The provisions of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act apply when issued cheques are dishonored due to insufficient funds, thus reinforcing the legal obligation of repayment.
The issuance of a cheque signifies a legally enforceable debt under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, and the burden to prove otherwise lies with the accused, not the complainant.
Failure to rebut presumption under Sections 118 and 139 of NI Act by proving probable defence results in conviction under Section 138 for cheque dishonour, even if claimed as security; revisional jur....
The legal enforceability of debt or liability under the NI Act is influenced by the provisions of the Income Tax Act, and unaccounted cash transactions may impact the enforceability of debts.
Presumption under NI Act ss.118,139 rebuttable on preponderance of probabilities by probable defence; accused's unproved allegation of cheque amount misuse fails rebuttal. Revision jurisdiction limit....
Dishonoured cheque attracts presumption of lawful debt under NI Act unless rebutted by accused on preponderance of probabilities; failure justifies conviction even for security cheque with subsisting....
The presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act applies, placing the burden of proof on the accused to establish a probable defence against dishonour of a cheque.
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
