Back
DEEPAK GUPTA
Sarabjit Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Mr. Deepak Gupta, J.
This order shall dispose of four revision petitions titled above, as issue involved in all these cases pertains to same transaction and as in all the cases, same facts and question of law are involved.
2. The facts are taken from CRR N: 1007-2010 (O&M). The revision is against the order dated 15.03.2010 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Patiala, upholding the judgment/order dated 09.06.2006 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Samana, convicting petitioner No.1 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881, and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for a period of 1 year and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,500/-.
3. Respondent No.2 Federation filed the complaint against petitioner No.2-M/s Sardar Exports Ltd., Samana, and its Director Sarabjit Singh (petitioner No.1) alleging that paddy was issued to the accused by the Markfed, Patiala for milling purposes for the year 1997- 98. Out of 197 wagons delivered to the accused, they failed to deliver 52 wagons of rice and as security, issued 8 cheques, including four cheques involved in these cases, drawn at Punjab National Bank, Samana. On presentation, the cheques w
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of the presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and the importance of proving the contrary to rebut the pres....
The presumption under Section 139 of the N.I. Act mandates that issued cheques are presumed to be for legally enforceable debts, which the accused must rebut with evidence.
The complainant must prove the existence of a legally enforceable debt for a successful prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
The court upheld the conviction under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, affirming that a cheque issued for a legally enforceable debt is valid despite a shorter notice period for payment.
The omission of particulars in lending does not negate a conviction for dishonor of a cheque if sufficient evidence of issuance exists; excessive interest imposition may be modified.
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 ....
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
