Back
DINESH KUMAR PALIWAL
Vikrambhai Patel – Appellant
Versus
Praveen Group – Respondent
ORDER
1. The present petition has been filed to quash orders dated 11.4.2023, 6.12.2024 and 19.12.2024 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Jabalpur in SCNIA Case No. 600/2023 (Praveen Group of Constructions through Proprietor Praveen Kumar Patel v. Vikram Bhai Vallabh Bhai Patel) whereby cognizance has been taken against the petitioner herein on 11.4.2023 for commission of offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and order dated 6.12.2024 whereby an application under section 45 and 73 of the Evidence Act filed by the petitioner/accused has been dismissed. As the petitioner has sought time till March, 2025 to produce defence evidence as accused is in some foreign country, by the order dated 19.12.2024, the trial Court has directed accused to produce his defence evidence otherwise his defence will be closed.
2. The aforesaid orders have not been challenged before the Court of Session by filing revision but have been directly challenged before this Court and petitioner has prayed to set aside the aforesaid orders.
3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is facing trial in SCNIA Case No.600/2023 (Praveen Group of Constructions through
The accused has the right to rebut the presumption of a legally enforceable debt and must be granted an opportunity to adduce evidence in rebuttal, including the examination of a handwriting expert.
The defense of the accused regarding the misuse of the cheque and the absence of liability are matters of evidence to be proved by the accused.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the presumption of liability of the drawer of the cheques under Section 138 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, and the obligation on the ac....
The admission of the respondent's signature on the cheques made the appointment of a handwriting expert unnecessary.
Accused must prove that a signed cheque was not issued in discharge of a debt, as merely admitting the signature imposes the burden of proof under Section 139 of the NI Act.
Once the signatures are admitted, the filling of the body of the cheque by another person is immaterial, and no useful purpose would be served by comparing the handwriting. The accused has a valuable....
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
