Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
R.K.PATTANAIK
Nalini Kanta Nayak – Appellant
Versus
Prasanna Kumar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's challenge to conviction under section 138 ni act (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. claims of liability and security cheque raised by parties (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 11 , 14) |
| 3. court's analysis of liability and pending civil action's impact (Para 10 , 12 , 13 , 15) |
| 4. modification of conviction and compensation order (Para 16) |
| 5. final judgment and order of the court (Para 17 , 18) |
JUDGMENT :
R.K. PATTANAIK, J.
1. Instant revision filed under Section 401 read with Section 397 Cr.P.C. is at the behest of the petitioner assailing the impugned judgment dated 2nd May, 2022 as at Annexure-2 passed in connection 1CC Case No.1190 of 2015 (T.R. No.137 of 2019) confirmed in Criminal Appeal No.19 of 2022 by judgment dated 4th November, 2023 i.e. Annexure-2 passed by the learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Bhubaneswar for having convicted him for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the NI Act followed by a sentence and to pay compensation of Rs.30 lac in terms of Section 357 (3) Cr.P.C. with a default sentence on the grounds inter alia that the order of conviction cannot be sustained in law and hence, liable to be interfered with and set aside in the interest of justice.
2. T
A cheque issued as security raises presumption of debt under Section 138 of the NI Act, which can be rebutted by proving no liability exists; concurrent civil proceedings do not preclude criminal act....
The proprietor of a sole proprietorship holding liability for a dishonored cheque under Section 138 NI Act does not require the business entity to be arrayed as an accused.
Point of Law : Inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. though wide, has to be exercised sparingly, carefully and with caution and only when such exercise is justified by the tests specificall....
Power of attorney holders can file cheque dishonour complaints if they possess personal knowledge of the transaction; absence of such knowledge may invalidate the complaint.
A person who is not a signatory to the cheque cannot be prosecuted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, for the offence of dishonour of cheque for insufficiency of funds.
(1) Dishonour of cheque – A person might have been jointly liable to pay debt, but if such a person who might have been liable to pay debt jointly, cannot be prosecuted unless bank account is jointly....
In dishonored cheque cases under the N.I. Act, the presumption of debt arises upon dishonor, requiring the accused to rebut the presumption with credible evidence.
The drawer of a cheque under Section 138 of the N.I. Act bears the burden to rebut the presumption of liability; failure to do so can result in conviction for cheque dishonour.
Interim compensation under Section 143-A of the NI Act requires a prima facie evaluation of the merits of the case; if disputes exist regarding cheque validity, compensation should not be granted.
The denial of liability and refusal to pay the cheque amounts by the accused constituted a valid cause of action for filing the complaint under Section 138 of the NI Act, despite being filed before 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
