Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA
Rajeev Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Arpana Devi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. cheque dishonoured for insufficient funds after loan. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. accused admitted signature, claimed security cheque. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. lower courts upheld section 138 conviction. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. accused claims security cheque misused by complainant. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 5. revisional jurisdiction limited to patent errors. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 6. section 138 offence requires five ingredients. (Para 14) |
| 7. presumptions under sections 118,139 arise on execution. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 8. presumption obviates proving loan advancement. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 9. accused must adduce evidence to rebut presumption. (Para 23 , 24) |
| 10. security cheques attract section 138 liability. (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 11. bank memo presumes dishonour for insufficiency. (Para 29 , 30) |
| 12. notice served if not returned undelivered. (Para 31 , 32) |
| 13. all section 138 ingredients satisfied. (Para 33) |
| 14. imprisonment and compensation sentence adequate. (Para 34 , 35 , 36 , 37) |
| 15. default imprisonment valid for compensation. (Para 38 , 39 , 40) |
| 16. revision dismissed, conviction upheld. (Para 41 , 42) |
JUDGMENT :
RAKESH KAINTHLA, J.
1. The present revision is directed against the judgment dated 04.
Admission of cheque signature triggers presumption under Sections 118(a) and 139 NI Act of debt discharge; security cheques attract Section 138 liability on dishonour; accused must rebut with evidenc....
Admission of cheque signature raises presumption under NI Act ss.118(a),139 of debt discharge; accused must rebut with evidence, not mere denial. Revisional jurisdiction bars reappreciation absent pe....
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 ....
Admission of cheque issuance raises rebuttable presumption under Sections 118/139 NI Act of discharge of debt; security cheques attract Section 138 liability if debt subsists; accused must lead evide....
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....
Admission of cheque signatures triggers presumption of debt under NI Act ss.118/139, rebuttable only by accused evidence; security cheques attract s.138 liability if debt subsists; revisional jurisdi....
Presumption under NI Act Sections 118/139 arises on cheque issuance admission; security cheque attracts Section 138 liability if debt exists; not rebutted here. Revisional jurisdiction limited to per....
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....
Revisional jurisdiction limited; no reappreciation of evidence absent perversity. NI Act presumptions u/ss 118,139 arise on cheque admission; accused must rebut with evidence. No initial complainant ....
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
