Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA
Ankush Kango – Appellant
Versus
PNB – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. lower courts upheld conviction under section 138 ni act. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. parties dispute rebuttal of ni act presumption. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. revisional jurisdiction limited; no evidence reappreciation without perversity. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 4. specific ingredients constitute section 138 ni act offence. (Para 20) |
| 5. signature admission triggers sections 118(a) and 139 presumptions. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 6. section 139 presumption relieves complainant of proving consideration initially. (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 7. section 313 statement does not rebut statutory presumption. (Para 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 8. drawer liable regardless of who filled cheque details. (Para 32 , 33 , 34 , 35) |
| 9. bank dishonour memo presumes insufficient funds. (Para 36 , 37) |
| 10. served notice and non-payment satisfy s.138 requirements. (Para 38 , 39 , 40) |
| 11. four months imprisonment adequate deterrent under ni act. (Para 41 , 42) |
| 12. fine twice cheque amount compensates complainant justly. (Para 43 , 44) |
| 13. revision dismissed; conviction and sentence affirmed. (Para 45 , 46 , 47) |
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
The present revision is directed against the judgm
Signature admission on cheque triggers Sections 118(a),139 NI Act presumption of debt discharge; accused must rebut by evidence, mere denial insufficient; revisional jurisdiction limited, no interfer....
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....
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 ....
Admission of cheque execution raises presumptions under NI Act Sections 118(a) & 139 of consideration and liability discharge; accused must rebut with evidence. Revisional court under CrPC Section 39....
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 ....
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....
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....
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 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....
Revisional jurisdiction limited to perversity; presumption under NI Act Sections 118,139 not rebutted by mere denial or police report without bank intimation; concurrent findings upheld where defence....
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
