Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SUBHASH CHAND, J.
Rakesh Kumar Sinha, son of late Ramesh Chandra Sinha – Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand – Respondents
Criminal Revision No.147 of 2023
Decided on : 19-02-2024
[N.I. Act] - [Dishonour of Cheque] - [Sections 138, 139, 118, 142] - [The court discussed the provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act, particularly Sections 138 and 139, which establish the framework for the dishonour of cheques and the presumption of liability. Section 138 outlines the offence of dishonour due to insufficient funds, while Section 139 creates a presumption that a cheque was issued for the discharge of a debt. The court emphasized that these presumptions are rebuttable but require the accused to provide evidence to counter them. The court's decision was influenced by the lack of evidence from the accused to disprove the presumption of liability.]
JUDGMENT :
SUBHASH CHAND, J.
1. This Criminal Revision has been preferred against the impugned judgment dated 10.03.2021 passed by the learned District & Sessions Judge-VII, Hazaribag in Criminal Appeal No.92 of 2017, whereby and whereunder, dismissed the appeal and affirmed the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence dated 26.07.2017 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Hazaribag in C.P. Case No.895 of 2014 corresponding to T.R. Case No.3590 of 2017, wherein the petitioner had been found guilty for the offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act and had been sentenced to undergo RI for one year and directed to pay Rs.24,00,000/-as compensation to the complainant exercising the power under Section 357(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
2. The brief facts leading to this Criminal Revision are that the complainant-opposite party Baldeo Prasad Mehta had filed a complaint with these allegations that he had good terms with the accused Rakesh Kumar Sinha, who wanted to sell his land, so he approached to the complainant and complainant became ready to purchase the same and Rs.20 lakhs was given in advance. Despite having taken the advance amount of Rs.20 lakhs from the complainant, the accused had sold the same to another person. When the complainant made demand to refund the money, he issued two cheques each of Rs.10 lakhs dated 06.03.2014 and 08.03.2014 bearing cheque Nos. 610799 and 610800 respectively. The complainant presented both the cheques for encashment in the account of Bank of India, Hazaribag but both the cheques were returned dishonored on 27.03.2014 on account of insufficient funds in the account of the drawer of the cheques. The complainant sent the legal notice to the accused on 07.04.2014. On 30.04.2014, the petitioner-accused asked to the complainant why the legal notice was sent to him, on which, he further promised to return the said amount of the cheque by 07.05.2014. Still the accused failed to comply his promise then the complaint petition was filed against the petitioner-accused.
3. The complainant filed affidavit under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, on the basis of the same, the accused Rakesh Kumar Sinha was summoned for the offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act.
4. The substance of accusation was recorded of the accused Rakesh Kumar Sinha under Section 251 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the learned trial Court and the same was explained and read over to him, who denied the same and pleaded not guilty and claimed to face the trial.
5. On behalf of the complainant examined C.W.-1, Baldeo Prasad Mehta himself and in documentary evidence filed Exhibit-1, Cheque No.610799 dated 06.03.2014 issued by the accused; Exhibit-1/1, return memo of cheque No. 610799 dated 27.03.2014; Exhibit-2, Cheque No.610800 dated 08.03.2014 issued by the accused; Exhibit-2/1, return memo of Cheque No.610800 dated 27.03.2014; Exhibit-3, demand notice dated 07.04.2014; Exhibit-3/1, postal receipt No. RJ044803045IN dated 07.04.2014; Exhibit-4, signature of complainant’s advocate on the complaint petition and; Exhibit-5, delivery report of the notice issued by Postal Department.
6. The statement of accused-petitioner under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was recorded, in which, he denied the evidence against him in the complaint case and stated himself to be innocent and he did not adduce any defence evidence.
7. The learned Trial Court after hearing the rival submissions of both the parties, passed the impugned judgment of conviction, convicted the petitioner-accused under Section 138 of the N.I. Act and sentenced him to undergo RI for one year vide order dated 26.07.2017 for the offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act and the convict was directed to pay Rs.24 lakhs to the complainant.
8. Aggrieved from the impugned judgment of conviction and the order of sentence dated 26.07.2017, the convict Rakesh Kumar Sinha preferred Criminal Appeal No.92 of 2017 in the Court of learned Di
The accused's failure to rebut the presumption under Section 139 of the NI Act and the service of notice of dishonour within the prescribed period led to the Court upholding the conviction and the co....
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....
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 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....
The presumption under Section 139 of the NI Act mandates that a cheque is presumed to be issued for discharge of a debt unless the accused proves otherwise.
Presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act requires the accused to present credible evidence to rebut the holder's claim of legal liability regarding the cheque issued.
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
