Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI
Kanak Chandra Bordoloi, Son of Late Bhogi Ram Bordoloi – Appellant
Versus
State of Assam, Represented by P.P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
KAUSHIK GOSWAMI, J.
Heard Mr. S. Nawaz, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. M.K. Das, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 and Ms. S.H. Borah, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State respondent.
2. By way of this petition under Section 401 read with Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Cr.PC’), the petitioner is assailing the Judgment & Order dated 14.03.2018 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sonitpur, Tezpur (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Appellate Court’) in Criminal Appeal No. 14(S-3) of 2016, whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed by up-holding the Judgment & Order dated 15.09.2013 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sonitpur, Tezpur (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Magistrate Court’) in N.I Case No. 39/2013 registered under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, (hereinafter referred to as the ‘N.I. Act’).
3. The brief facts of the case is that a complaint petition was filed by the respondent No. 2 on 06.01.2014 alleging inter alia that the petitioner, upon seeking financial help from him by way of loan, he in good faith lend him
The presumption of liability under the Negotiable Instruments Act is rebuttable, but the accused must provide sufficient evidence to meet the standard of preponderance of probabilities.
Criminal Law - Dishonoured of Cheque - Appeal against conviction - Petitioner in this case, did not raise any probable defence which would create doubts in mind of Court. Court find no reason to inte....
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....
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 ....
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....
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....
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....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the rebuttable presumption under Section 139 NI Act and the burden of proof on the accused to rebut the presumption of discharge of debt or liabili....
The presumption of a legally enforceable debt under Sections 138 and 139 of the N.I. Act is strong and requires evidence to the contrary by the accused, which was not provided.
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
