Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA
Hem Chand – Appellant
Versus
HP State Co-Opr. Agriculture & Rural Development Bank – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. cheque issued for loan repayment dishonoured. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. lower courts upheld conviction under s.138 ni act. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 3. petitioner claims no debt proof, blank cheque misuse. (Para 8 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. revisional jurisdiction limited to patent errors, perversity. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 5. signature admission raises s.139 debt presumption. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 6. loan admission shifts burden to rebut presumption. (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 7. blank security cheques attract s.138 liability. (Para 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35) |
| 8. dishonour and notice satisfy s.138 ingredients. (Para 36 , 37 , 38) |
| 9. sentence, compensation reasonable; revision dismissed. (Para 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44) |
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
The present revision is directed against the judgment dated 08.05.2025, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge- I, Mandi, Himachal Pradesh (Camp at Karsog)(learned Appellate Court), vide which the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 15.06.2014, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Karsog, District Mandi, H.P. (learned Trial Court) were upheld. (Parties shall hereinafter be referred
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....
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 ....
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....
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.
Presumptions under Sections 118(a) and 139 NI Act arise on implicit admission of cheque issuance via cross-examination; accused must rebut with evidence, not mere denial; revisional jurisdiction limi....
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
