Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.VELMURUGAN, J
A.S.Chandrasekar @ Chandru S/o.Seethapathy – Appellant
Versus
A.L.Sivakumar (Died) S.Sudha W/o.Late A.L.Sivakumar – Respondent
ORDER
This Criminal Revision Case has been filed by the petitioner to set aside the judgment dated 26.06.2023 made in C.A. No.62 of 2020 on the file of the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vellore at Ranipet confirming the judgment dated 07.01.2020 made in S.T.C.No.307 of 2017 on the file of the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate Court, Arcot.
2. The case of the petitioner is that the original complainant namely A.L.Sivakumar had filed a complaint against the petitioner under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act in S.T.C.No.307 of 2017 on the file of the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate Court, Arcot. The trial Court, after enquiry, found the guilt of the petitioner and convicted and sentenced him to undergo one year simple imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- and in default of payment of fine amount, to undergo two months simple imprisonment. Aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and sentence, the petitioner filed appeal before the II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vellore at Ranipet in C.A. No.62 of 2020 and during pendency of the appeal, the original complainant died and thereby, the wife of the complainant namely S.Sudha
The court ruled that the failure to rebut the legal presumption of debt under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act justifies conviction, with the sentence modified to compensation.
The liability under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is strict, and the nature of the cheque does not absolve the accused from responsibility for dishonour.
The compensatory nature of proceedings under Section 138 of NI Act and the court's authority to modify the sentence and compensation amount based on relevant legal provisions.
The court upheld the conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, affirming the presumption of a legally enforceable debt and allowing time for payment.
The main legal point established is the presumption of guilt under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act when a cheque is dishonored due to insufficient funds, and the legal requirements for ....
A debtor remains liable under Section 138 unless full payment of the cheque amount is proven, irrespective of partial payments acknowledged.
Settlement and compounding of an offence under the Negotiable Instruments Act after conviction can lead to the setting aside of the conviction if both parties agree.
Presumption in favor of the holder of the cheque under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
In cheque dishonour cases, the burden of proof lies on the accused to rebut the presumption of issuance for a debt, emphasizing compensatory justice over punitive measures.
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
