Back
M. K. THAKKER
Shriram Transport Finance Co. Limited – Appellant
Versus
State of Gujarat – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
M.K. THAKKER, J.
1. This appeal is filed under section 378 of the Criminal Procedure Code (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C.) challenging the judgment and order of acquittal passed in Criminal Case No. 14868 of 2019 by the Learned 20th Additional Senior Civil and Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Surat dated 26-09-2022.
2. The case of the complainant is that, complainant is running a finance business in the name and style of Shriram Finance Company Limited and lending money by hypothecating the vehicle and executing the deeds. The accused had obtained a loan facility from the complainant’s company on the vehicle bearing registration No. GJ-05-AU-7515 and the hypothecation cum loan agreement was executed. As the accused committed default in payment of installment regularly, the complainant had informed the respondent-accused, and to discharge the liability of making the repayment of the loan amount, the cheque bearing No. 019221 of ICICI bank Kamrej branch, Surat was issued for an amount of Rs. 4,20,000/- towards part payment. On depositing the said cheque, it was returned with an endorsement of “Funds Insufficient” therefore the demand notice was issued to the responde
The main legal point established in the judgment is the rebuttable nature of statutory presumptions under the Negotiable Instruments Act, particularly in cases of dishonoured cheques, and the burden ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the presumption under Section 118 and Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the burden of proof on the accused to rebut the presumption, a....
The presumption in favor of the complainant under the N.I. Act is rebuttable, and the standard of proof required to prove a defense in a criminal case is preponderance of probabilities.
The legal principle established is that the presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is rebuttable, and the onus is on the accused to raise a probable defense.
Dishonour of cheque – Whereas prosecution must prove guilt of an accused beyond all reasonable doubt, standard of proof so as to prove a defence on part of accused is preponderance of probabilities.
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.
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.
The presumption of debt under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is not rebutted by mere denial; the accused must provide credible evidence to support their defense.
The accused can rebut the presumption in favor of the complainant by raising a probable defense, and the burden of proof shifts to the complainant in such cases.
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
