Back
RAKESH KAINTHLA
Ashok Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Parveen Kumar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
The present revision is directed against the judgment dated 01.11.2018 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Kangra at Dharamshala, vide which the appeal filed by the revisionist (accused before the learned Trial Court) was dismissed. (Parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they were referred before the learned Trial Court for convenience).
2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present revision are that the complainant filed a complaint before the learned Trial Court against the accused for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (in short ‘NI Act’). It was asserted that the complainant and the accused had good relations with each other. The accused approached the complainant on 04.01.2007 and demanded Rs.1,00,000/-for some business with an assurance to return the same after a few months. The accused returned the amount of Rs. 50,000/ - on 04.01.2007. He again borrowed a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- on 03.05.2007 and assured to return the same together with the earlier amount. The accused returned Rs.30,000/- on 02.12.2007. He again borrowed Rs.1,00,000/- and retu
Dishonour of cheque – If cheque is drawn not on account maintained by accused but by some other person, same will not attract provisions of Section 138 of NI Act.
For conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the cheque must be drawn on an account maintained by the accused. Insufficient connection leads to invalid liability.
Admission of cheque issuance raises rebuttable presumption under Sections 118(a), 139 NI Act of discharge of debt; security cheques attract Section 138 liability if subsisting debt exists; revisional....
Admission of cheque signature raises NI Act presumptions of debt discharge (ss.118(a),139); accused must rebut with evidence, not mere denial. Security/blank signed cheques attract s.138 liability de....
Admission of cheque issuance triggers presumption of debt under NI Act; security cheque liable for existing liability; unlicensed moneylender's NI complaint maintainable; revisional court defers to c....
NI Act s.139 presumption rebutted by evidence of prior unpaid loans, pending litigations, and improbability of further advance; revisional jurisdiction under CrPC s.397 limited to perversity or ignor....
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 narrowly confines to errors of law or perversity, upholding conviction for cheque dishonour based on accused's admissions under Section 313 CrPC; zero balance via NPA transfer....
Revisional jurisdiction limited to perversity; presumption under Sections 118/139 NI Act on cheque admission; security cheque liable if debt subsists; unclaimed notice deemed served; post-dishonour r....
Revisional jurisdiction limited to patent errors, no reappreciation absent perversity; presumption of debt under NI Act holds post cheque admission unless robustly rebutted; security cheques attract ....
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
