M. K. THAKKER
Kathadbhai Lakshmanbhai Sorathiya – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. This appeal is filed under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 challenging the judgment and order of acquittal dated 06.06.2023 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Babara, District Amreli in Criminal Case No.252 of 2020 acquitting the respondent-No.2 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (‘the N.I.Act’ hereinafter).
2. The facts of the complaint is as under:
2.1. The complainant had filed the aforesaid case before the concerned Court and contended that the complainant is the resident of village Vinchiya, Taluka Gadhada, District Amreli and respondent No.2-original accused is also resident of the same village and they were having the relations through one of the nearest relative. As the respondent No.2-accused, was in a financial needs, had borrowed Rs.25 Lakh before six months before the date of issuance of the notice. At the time of borrowing the money, the respondent No.2-original accused has assured that within a period of two months, the amount would be repaid. After two months, the demand was raised, time and again, but the respondent No.2 remained fails in repaying however, the cheque of Rs.25 Lakh being No.011
M.S.NARAYANA MENON ALIAS MANI VS. STATE OF KERALA AND ANOTHER
The presumption of liability under the Negotiable Instruments Act requires the complainant to establish a prima facie case, after which the burden shifts to the accused to disprove claims. Insufficie....
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 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 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 main legal point established in the judgment is that the presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is rebuttable, and the burden lies on the accused to raise a probable defe....
The accused must discharge the evidential burden to rebut the statutory presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, and fair and judicious procedure is essential in cases under S....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the significance of the accused raising a probable defense to rebut the presumption under Section 139 of the N.I. Act, and the requirement for the ....
The main legal point established is that the failure to rebut the presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act can lead to conviction under Section 138 of the Act.
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 complainant must establish the existence of a legally enforceable debt for a conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act; failure to do so results in acquittal.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.