Back
RAJ BEER SINGH
Sultan Alam – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the order dated 03.11.2020, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Meerut in criminal revision no. 139 of 2020, (M. Kamal v. State of U.P. And Another), under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘N.I. Act’), police station Kotwali, district Meerut.
3. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the impugned order is against facts and law and thus, liable to be set aside. It was submitted that opposite party no. 2 has issued a cheque of Rs. 11 lacs in favour of applicant, which was presented in bank for encashment but it was dishonoured on 05.08.2015. The applicant has issued demand notice to opposite party no. 2 on 24.08.2015 at his last given address but it was returned back with endorsement dated 02.09.2015 to the effect that despite going for several times, opposite party no. 2 is not available at the given address. Thereafter, the applicant has filed a complaint under Section 138 of N.I. Act on 29.09
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the factum of disputed service of notice requires adjudication on the basis of evidence and can only be done and appreciated by the trial cour....
Negotiable Instruments – Factum of disputed service of notice requires adjudication on the basis of evidence and the same can only be done and appreciated by the trial court and not by this Court und....
For a conviction under Section 138, the complainant must prove both enforceable debt and properly served demand notice; failure to do so leads to acquittal.
The main legal point established is the presumption of service of notice when sent through registered post, as provided under section 27 of the General Clauses Act.
Service of notice under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is presumed when sent to the correct address, placing the burden on the accused to prove non-receipt.
The court established that a conditional cheque can lead to liability under Section 138 N.I. Act, and that service of notice via courier and WhatsApp is valid, expanding the interpretation of service....
(1) Dishonour of cheque – Notice sent through courier service is valid service under Section 138 of N.I. Act – However, presumption of delivery of service of notice under Section 27 of General Clause....
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
