Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
VIKAS BUDHWAR
Sakshi Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application to quash complaint under ni act. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments against legal debt liability under section 138. (Para 5 , 9) |
| 3. court's stance on cheque dishonor and section 138. (Para 6 , 10 , 15) |
| 4. bail granted, no coercive action till bail is decided. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 20 , 21) |
JUDGMENT :
Vikas Budhwar, J.
1. Heard Sri K. Kartikeya, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri S.K. Singh, learned AGA for the State.
2. This application u/s 528 of BNSS has been preferred to quash the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 7354 of 2023 (Keshav Singh V/s Sakshi Yadav), under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 as well as summoning order dated 17.01.2024 passed by the Ld. Chief Judicial Magistrate-Ist, Gautam Budha Nagar, in Complaint Case No. 7354 of 2023, under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Police Station-Sector 24, District - Gautam Budha Nagar.
3. The case of the applicant that on 10.10.2023, a complaint came to be lodged by the opposite party no. 2 against the applicant under Section 138 of the NI Act with an allegation that the opposite party no. 2 runs a medical store and so far as the applicant herein, she runs a swee
The court held that debt alleged under Section 138 must be proven unless countered; evidence is necessary for defenses regarding cash transactions.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that compliance with legal provisions, including the conduct of an inquiry as required under Section 202(1) Cr.P.C., and the applicability of Secti....
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 court established that for a complaint under Section 138 of the N.I. Act to be maintainable, specific procedural requirements must be met and reflected in the summoning order, including the prese....
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 cheque returned with the endorsement 'account closed' constitutes dishonour under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, and the statutory presumption of liability under Section 139 applies unless rebutted b....
Dishonour of a cheque under Section 138 is actionable regardless of claims of stop payment or misplaced cheque, with legal presumptions favoring existence of debt or liability.
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
