Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
SANDEEP SHARMA
Pravesh Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Om Prakash – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. cheque dishonoured for insufficient funds after notice (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. accused failed to rebut debt presumption (Para 7 , 9 , 12) |
| 3. section 139 presumption requires probable defence (Para 8) |
| 4. security cheques attract section 138 liability (Para 10 , 11) |
| 5. limited revisional jurisdiction bars re-appreciation (Para 13 , 14) |
| 6. conviction upheld; revision dismissed (Para 15 , 16) |
Instant criminal revision petition filed under Section 442 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, lays challenge to judgment dated 06.03.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur, H.P., in Criminal Appeal No.46/2024, affirming the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 02.04.2024, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.2 Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur, H.P. in Criminal Complaint No.328 of 2021, whereby the learned Court below, while holding the petitioner-accused (hereinafter "accused") guilty of having committed offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (in short the "Act”), convicted and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment fo
Failure to rebut presumption under Sections 118 and 139 of NI Act by proving probable defence results in conviction under Section 138 for cheque dishonour, even if claimed as security; revisional jur....
Presumption under NI Act ss.118,139 rebuttable on preponderance of probabilities by probable defence; accused's unproved allegation of cheque amount misuse fails rebuttal. Revision jurisdiction limit....
Failure to raise probable defence on preponderance of probabilities fails to rebut presumption under Section 139 NI Act; security cheques towards loan liability attract Section 138 upon dishonour.
Statutory presumption under Sections 118/139 NI Act not rebutted by accused's unproved security cheque claim; even security for loan debt attracts Section 138 conviction on dishonour; no revisional i....
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.
A cheque issued as security can be subjected to Section 138 liabilities; presumption under Section 139 requires the accused to establish a probable defence for avoidance of conviction.
Failure to raise probable defence sustains presumptions under Sections 118 & 139 NI Act regarding cheque for lawful debt; revisional court upholds concurrent conviction absent miscarriage of justice.....
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....
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.
Accused failing to raise probable defence on preponderance of probabilities cannot rebut Section 139 presumption in cheque dishonour cases; revisional court upholds concurrent conviction absent misca....
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
