Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KAINTHLA
Vinod Kumar – Appellant
Versus
UCo Bank – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Rakesh Kainthla, J.)
The present revision is directed against the judgment dated 10.04.2024, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur, vide which the judgment of conviction dated 14.09.2022 and order of sentence dated 24.09.2022 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghumarwin, Court No.1, District Bilaspur (learned Trial Court) were upheld. (Parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience.)
2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are that the complainant filed a complaint before the learned Trial Court 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 had advanced a loan of Rs.3 lakhs to the accused on 24th April 2013 as a working capital/CC limit. The accused issued a cheque on 30th July 2016 for Rs.3,25,787 to return the loan. The complainant presented the cheque for collection on 30th July 2016, but the cheque was dishonoured with the endorsement “insufficient funds”. The complainant issued a notice to the accused o
The presumption of liability under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is strong and can only be rebutted by substantial evidence, which the accused failed to provide.
The presumption of consideration under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act applies once a cheque's issuance is admitted, shifting the burden to the accused to rebut this presumptio....
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 raises presumption of debt under NI Act; accused must rebut by preponderance even if blank security cheque; revisional jurisdiction limited, upholds concurrent findings ....
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 presumption of liability under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is rebuttable, and the accused must provide evidence to counter it; failure to do so results in conviction.
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....
Admission of cheque signature triggers Section 139 presumption of liability; accused must rebut by preponderance of probabilities with probable defence. Revisional court limited to correcting pervers....
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 triggers presumption under Sections 118(a),139 NI Act of enforceable debt; security cheque liable under Section 138 if subsisting liability exists; accused fails to rebut by prepo....
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
