Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SATISH KUMAR JAIN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF NCT DELHI & ANR. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to conviction under ni act (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. allegation of loan and cheque issuance (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court's observations on evidence and presumptions (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. arguments presented by parties (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 5. limitations of revisional jurisdiction (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 6. presumptions under ni act and burden of proof (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 7. failure to rebut presumptions (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25) |
| 8. dismissal of the petition (Para 26 , 27) |
JUDGMENT :
AMIT MAHAJAN, J.
1. The present petition is filed under Section 397 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (‘CrPC’) against the judgment dated 24.05.2023 (hereafter ‘impugned order’) passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (‘ASJ’), South West, Dwarka Courts, Delhi in CA No. 101/2021 titled Satish Kumar Jain vs. Jugal Kishore & Anr.
2. By impugned order, the learned ASJ dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner against the judgment dated 07.03.2020 and order on sentence dated 28.08.2021, passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate (‘MM’), Dwarka Courts, Delhi whereby the petitioner was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (‘NI
The burden of proof under Section 138 of the NI Act lies on the accused to establish a probable defense against established presumption of debt when signatures on cheques are admitted.
Dishonour of cheque – Appeal against acquittal – Presumption under Section 139 read with Section 118 of NI Act is essentially based on pure common sense – Statement of accused under Section 313 Cr.P.....
Signature admission on cheque triggers Sections 118(a),139 NI Act presumption of debt discharge; accused must rebut by evidence, mere denial insufficient; revisional jurisdiction limited, no interfer....
Signature admission on cheque raises presumption of debt under NI Act; accused must rebut by preponderance even if blank security cheque; revisional jurisdiction limited, upholds concurrent findings ....
Revisional jurisdiction limited to perversity, not reappreciating evidence. Section 139 NI Act presumption of debt from admitted cheque issuance rebuttable only by probable defence on preponderance o....
Admission of cheque execution raises presumptions under NI Act Sections 118(a) & 139 of consideration and liability discharge; accused must rebut with evidence. Revisional court under CrPC Section 39....
NI Act s.139 presumption rebutted by evidence of prior unpaid loans, pending litigations, and improbability of further advance; revisional jurisdiction under CrPC s.397 limited to perversity or ignor....
The presumption under Sections 138 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act mandates that once a cheque's issuance is admitted, it is presumed to be for a legally enforceable debt, shifting the burd....
Admission of cheque triggers presumption of debt under NI Act Sections 118(a), 139; security cheques attract Section 138 if liability exists; rebuttal by preponderance needed, not mere denial; revisi....
Admission of cheque signature triggers Section 139 presumption of liability; accused must rebut by preponderance of probabilities with probable defence. Revisional court limited to correcting pervers....
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
