Back
PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
Sanjay Agarwal S/o Late Babulal Agarwal – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.
1. The instant Criminal Revision is directed against judgment dated 01.06.2016 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ghatshila in Criminal Appeal No. 61 of 2016, whereby and whereunder, the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 19.03.2016 for the offence under section 138 of N.I. Act passed against the petitioner/appellant vide complaint case No. 99 of 2011 (T.R. No. 15 of 2016) passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ghatshila, whereby the petitioner sentenced for SI for one year along with fine of Rs.28 lakhs as compensation has been upheld and confirmed.
2. The factual matrix giving rise to this revision is that one Ramesh Kumar Dhanuka instituted the aforesaid complaint case against the petitioner stating inter alia that petitioner is carrying on a business of sugar under the Name and Style, Nurshingardh Traders at Kharagpur, (West Bengal) and the complainant used to carry on sugar business. It is further alleged that earlier the petitioner came to the shop of the complainant and expressed his willingness to purchase sugar on credit which he refused. Later on, upon request of accused-petitioner and his guaranto
The requirement of legal notice under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is crucial, and failure to challenge its service undermines the defense.
The presumption of a debt under Sec. 139 of the N.I. Act is a significant legal principle, which places the burden on the accused to prove the contrary when a cheque is dishonored.
Valid service of demand notice under Section 138 NI Act requires delivery to drawer; receipt by unrelated person does not fulfill precondition, rendering complaint not maintainable without cause of a....
The cause of action for filing a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act cannot arise before expiry of 15 days from the date of service of notice upon the accused.
The presumption of guilt under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act requires the accused to present credible evidence to rebut it; a failure to do so leads to affirmation of conviction.
Dishonour of cheque – By making a higher demand in a notice sent under Section 138(b) of N.I. Act, would not by itself invalidate notice provided, details of claim towards additional amounts are spec....
The provisions of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act apply when issued cheques are dishonored due to insufficient funds, thus reinforcing the legal obligation of repayment.
Dishonour of cheque – Complainant is not required to prove service of notice on accused before institution of case—Requirement of giving notice is a clear departure from rule of criminal law, where t....
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
