Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
Deepak Kumar Pradhan – Appellant
Versus
Sweta Parekh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's charges under section 138. (Para 1) |
| 2. petitioner's defense regarding loan repayments. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 3. accused's right to fair trial and evidence. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. right to defense evidence and fair trial. (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. court's decision to allow summoning of witness. (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 6. crlmc allowed and directions on trial. (Para 17) |
JUDGMENT :
In the present case, the petitioner is facing charges for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short “the N.I. Act”) in 1.C.C. Case No.1240 of 2018 pending before the Court of the learned J.M.F.C., Bhubaneswar. The complainant has been prosecuting the petitioner for dishonouring of the cheque amounting to Rs.25 lakhs bearing Cheque No.000597 dated 09.02.2018. The statutory legal notice was issued to the petitioner by the complainant under of the N.I. Act, to which the petitioner did not reply. Therefore, he has been prosecuted by the opposite party/complainant for purportedly having committed the offence under of the N.I. Act.
3. Since July, 2015, the petitioner allegedly started making repayments towards the same loan amount on installments.
The accused has a fundamental right to defend themselves, including summoning witnesses, to ensure a fair trial as enshrined in Section 243(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
The court emphasized the accused's right to examine witnesses in defense without needing to specify their relevance, enabling fair trial rights.
The legal presumption under Section 139 of the NI Act favors the complainant, and factual disputes must be resolved at trial, not pre-trial.
A PRESUMPTION THAT A CHEQUE PERTAINS TO A LEGALLY ENFORCEABLE DEBT OR LIABILITY ARISES WHEN THE SIGNATURE ON THE CHEQUE IS ADMITTED, BUT THIS PRESUMPTION IS REBUTTABLE AND THE BURDEN OF PROOF LIES ON....
(1) Incriminating circumstances, regarding which no explanation has been called from accused, cannot be used against him.(2) Dishonour of cheque – Unless part payment is endorsed on cheque as per Sec....
The failure of the complainant to tender for further cross-examination led to the discarding of his evidence, which invalidated the judgments of conviction.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the presumption in favor of the holder under Section 139 of the NI Act, the rebuttable presumption of consideration under Section 118(a), and the r....
Service of notice under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is valid if delivered to a family member, establishing liability unless rebutted.
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
