Back
MITALI THAKURIA
Debesh Goswami, S/o. Late Ananta Mohan Goswami – Appellant
Versus
State of Assam – Respondent
2. This is an application under Section 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the Judgment and Order dated 07.07.2017 passed by the learned Additional Session Judge (FTC) No.3, Kamrup (M), Guwahati in Criminal Appeal No.200/2013, affirming the Judgment and Order dated 15.10.2013 passed by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kamrup (M), Guwahati in connection with the Complaint Case No. 1940/2008.
3. The brief facts of the case is that; the trial was initiated on the basis of the complaint made by one Sri Mahesh Sarma/present respondent No.2 alleging dishonor of cheque amounting to Rs.2,50,000/- (Rupees Two lakhs fifty thousand) only dated 07.01.2008. As per the complainant/present respondent No.2, the said amount was paid by him to the accused/petitioner for investment in some business which he failed to repay, and on repeated demand, the accused/petitioner was compelled to issue a cheque amounting to Rs.2,50,000/-(Rupees Two lakhs fifty thousand) only in favour of the complainant/present respondent No.2. But, when the cheque was presented for encasement, the Bank informed the respondent No.2/complainant about the dishonor of cheque due
Dishonour of cheque – When part payment has been made after debt was incurred and before cheque was encashed, entire cheque amount cannot be said to be legally enforceable debt.
The statutory presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act applies when the accused fails to raise a probable defense or contest the existence of a legally enforceable debt or liab....
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
