Back
M. B. SNEHALATHA
Salim A. , S/o. Assan Bava – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala – Respondent
ORDER :
Revision Petitioner is the accused in C.C.No.346/2014 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-IV (Mobile Court), Thiruvananthapuram. He assails the judgment in Crl.A No.219/2016 of Additional Sessions Court-II, Thiruvananthapuram which confirmed the conviction and sentence against him in C.C No.346/2014 for the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as ‘NI Act’).
2. The parties shall be referred to as complainant and accused.
3. The case of the complainant in brief is that Ext.P1 cheque issued by the accused in discharge of the liability of the accused to pay an amount of Rs.3 lakhs was bounced stating the reason “payment stopped by the drawer”. In spite of receipt of Ext.P4 lawyer notice, accused neither sent any reply nor paid the amount covered by Ext.P1 cheque. Accused thereby committed the offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I Act.
4. Accused pleaded not guilty to the accusation and denied issuance of Ext.P1 cheque in discharge of any debt or liability. His defence was that complainant, who was an employee in his shop, misused one of the signed blank cheques entrusted in connection with his busine
The accused must raise a probable defense to contest the existence of a legally enforceable debt or liability in cases of cheque dishonour under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, failing....
The presumption of liability under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act applies despite account seizure; the burden to disprove liability lies with the accused.
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....
Point of law: Dishonour of cheque - Discrepancy in the amount - Discrepancy in the amount reflected in the cheque and the actual amount due by the accused, the accused cannot be proceeded under secti....
The presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act applies, placing the burden of proof on the accused to establish a probable defence against dishonour of a cheque.
The presumption under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act remains in favor of the holder unless the accused provides credible evidence to rebut it.
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
