Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA
Naresh Kumar @ Titu – Appellant
Versus
Shimla Fruit Agency Coram – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background and lower courts upholding conviction under section 138 ni act (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. accused contends cheques were security, notice not served (Para 8 , 9) |
| 3. revisional court cannot re-appreciate evidence absent perversity (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 4. ingredients of section 138 ni act offence outlined (Para 17) |
| 5. presumption of debt arises on cheque admission; rebuttal needs evidence (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 6. security cheques attract section 138 if underlying debt exists (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 7. accused failed to rebut dishonour and debt presumptions (Para 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 8. notice refused by post deemed duly served (Para 32 , 33 , 34) |
| 9. imprisonment and twice-cheque compensation upheld appropriate (Para 35 , 36 , 37 , 38) |
| 10. revision dismissed confirming conviction and sentence (Para 39 , 40) |
Judgment :
Rakesh Kainthla J.
The present revision is directed against the judgment dated 10.03.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (CBI Court), Shimla (learned Appellate Court), vide which the judgment of conviction dated 22.07.2024 and order of sentence dated 30.07.2024 passed by learned Additional Chie
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....
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(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 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 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 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 raises presumption of debt under NI Act ss118(a),139; accused's lost cheque plea fails without bank report; revisional jurisdiction limited to perversity, upholding conc....
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....
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....
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
