Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA
Fokhoruddin Ali Ahmed, Son Of Late Intazuddin Ahmed – Appellant
Versus
Pranab Swargiary, Son Of Late Barun Swargiary – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA, J.
1. Heard Mr. S.S.S. Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S. Nawaz, learned counsel for respondent no.2.
2. This is an application under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Fokhoruddin Ali Ahmed, has prayed for quashing of the NICR Case No.11/2025, registered under Section 138 of N.I Act, 1881, pending before the learned Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chirang.
3. The brief facts of the case are that a complaint case being N.I.C.R. Case No. 11/2025 was registered by the respondent against the petitioner under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 claiming enforceable liability of an amount of Rs. 2,20,000/-(Rupees Two Lakhs Twenty Thousand Only) and the same is pending before the learned Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chirang.
4. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the allegations made in the complaint are all false and that the petitioner has lost his SBI cheque book bearing the account number 30132028434 of Bortalowa Bazar. The loss of the Cheque book was duly reported by the son of the petitioner Shahanur Ahmed at Kajalgaon Police station and a General Diary Entry vide
Violation of Section 269 SS of the Income Tax Act does not render transactions unenforceable under the Negotiable Instruments Act, as the presumption of liability remains unless effectively rebutted ....
Violations of cash transaction regulations under the Income Tax Act do not render debts legally unenforceable under the Negotiable Instruments Act.
A cash transaction exceeding Rs. 20,000 does not invalidate a legally enforceable debt under the Negotiable Instruments Act, which presumes a cheque pertains to such a debt upon acknowledgment of sig....
The legal enforceability of debt or liability under the NI Act is influenced by the provisions of the Income Tax Act, and unaccounted cash transactions may impact the enforceability of debts.
In dishonored cheque cases under the N.I. Act, the presumption of debt arises upon dishonor, requiring the accused to rebut the presumption with credible evidence.
The presumption under section 139 of the NI Act is rebuttable, and the standard of proof for rebuttal is 'preponderance of probabilities'.
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
