Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO, J
Bhadresh Mahendrabhai Manvawala – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the present application is filed (Para 1) |
| 2. the brief facts culled out (Para 2) |
| 3. being aggrieved and dissatisfied (Para 3 , 4) |
| 4. learned advocate ms.mita panchal (Para 5) |
| 5. learned app bhargav pandya (Para 6) |
| 6. since this is an application (Para 7) |
| 7. in light of the above settled (Para 8) |
| 8. the learned trial court has (Para 9) |
| 9. consequently, the present application (Para 10 , 11) |
ORDER :
1. The present application is filed by the applicant – original complainant under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “Cr.P.C.”) seeking leave to file an appeal against the judgment and order dated 23.08.2022 passed by the learned 2nd Additional Senior Civil Judge and Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Surat in Criminal Case No. 52516 of 2018, whereby the respondent No 2 original accused came to be acquitted from the charge levelled against him under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the NI Act”). The respondent No 2 is hereinafter referred to as “the accused” as he stood in the original case for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity.
2. The brief facts culled out from the memo of the present ap
The presumption of debt under Section 139 of the NI Act is rebuttable, requiring only a probable defense from the accused, not proof beyond reasonable doubt.
The presumption under Section 139 of the NI Act is rebuttable, and the burden of proof lies on the accused to establish a probable defense against the existence of a legally enforceable debt.
The presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is rebuttable, and the accused must raise a probable defense to contest the existence of a legally enforceable debt.
The presumption of a legally enforceable debt under Section 139 of the NI Act is rebuttable, and the burden lies on the accused to raise a probable defence.
The presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is rebuttable, requiring the applicant to prove the existence of a legally enforceable debt, which was not demonstrated in this cas....
The presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is rebuttable, and the burden lies on the accused to raise a probable defence, which was successfully established in this case.
The presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is mandatory, placing the burden on the accused to rebut the existence of a legally enforceable debt.
The presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is rebuttable; the complainant must establish the existence of a legally enforceable debt to succeed in a claim under Section 138.
The presumption under Section 139 of the NI Act establishes that a cheque is issued for a legally enforceable debt, placing the burden on the accused to rebut this presumption with a probable defense....
The presumption of liability under the Negotiable Instruments Act requires the complainant to establish a prima facie case, after which the burden shifts to the accused to disprove claims. Insufficie....
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
