Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI
Ismail Beg – Appellant
Versus
Vishal Jain – Respondent
ORDER :
RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI, J.
I.A. No.23461/2022, an application under Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking leave to appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 17.10.2022 passed in Criminal Appeal No.82/2021 (Vishal Jain Vs. Ismail Beg) by 14th Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal (M.P.) arising out of judgment dated 11.02.2020 passed in Criminal Case No.13398/2016 by JMFC, Bhopal, whereby the appellate court allowing the appeal has set aside the judgment of the Trial Court and has acquitted the respondent/accused (for short "accused") from the charge of offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
2 . I have gone through the impugned judgments of the Courts below. On due consideration leave is granted to appellant. I.A. No.23461/2022 is disposed of accordingly.
3. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally.
4 . The brief facts of the case, as alleged by the appellant/complainant (in short "complainant") in the complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'the NI Act") are that both the parties are known to each other. The complainant had given Rs.4,00,000/- for a mon
A presumption of debt exists under Sections 138 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, which the accused failed to rebut, affirming liability for dishonored cheques.
Presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act requires the accused to present credible evidence to rebut the holder's claim of legal liability regarding the cheque issued.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the presumption in favor of the holder under Section 139 of the NI Act, the rebuttable presumption of consideration under Section 118(a), and the r....
The presumption under Section 139 of the NI Act mandates that a cheque is presumed to be issued for discharge of a debt unless the accused proves otherwise.
The presumptions under sections 138 and 139 of the NI Act favor the holder, shifting the burden to the accused to rebut the claims of liability.
The burden is on the complainant to prove financial capacity when questioned; a mere presumption does not suffice if evidence is lacking.
The presumption under Section 139 of N.I. Act is a presumption of law, as distinguished from the presumption of facts. Presumptions are rules of evidence and do not conflict with the presumption of i....
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
