Back
S. TALAPATRA
Raju Saha – Appellant
Versus
Balai Chandra Das – Respondent
JUDGMENT
This appeal under Section 378 of the Cr.P.C. arises from the judgment and order of acquittal dated 12.06.2018 delivered in Case No.CR(NI) 11 of 2017 by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Court No.2, Udaipur, Gomati District.
02. The appellant filed the complaint which was registered as case No.CR(NI)11 of 2017, alleging that the respondent borrowed money from him on 21.11.2014 and the said money was paid to the respondent by a cheque bearing No.149938 drawn on State Bank of India, Udaipur Branch. The amount that was lent has been claimed to be Rs.2,50,000/-. The respondent needed that amount for purpose of his business, but the complainant has admitted in his complaint that the respondent is a Government employee. According to the complainant (the appellant herein), the said money was obtained as loan by exercising fraud on him. The said amount of Rs.2,50,000/- was encashed by the respondent on 24.11.2014. The said amount was collected through the respondent’s savings bank Account No.30062030020 maintained in the State Bank of India, Udaipur Branch. On several times, the complainant requested the respondent for repayment of the said loan. Finally, on 26.04.2015, the respo
A cheque issued as security does not constitute a legally enforceable debt under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, and the presumption of liability can be rebutted by presenting credible....
The presumption of consideration under Section 139 of the N.I. Act shifts the burden to the accused to prove non-existence of debt, which was not done in this case.
The presumption of liability under the NI Act is rebuttable, and the burden of proof lies on the complainant to establish the existence of a legally enforceable debt.
The issuance of a cheque carries a presumption of consideration, which is rebuttable by the accused. Failure to prove the non-existence of a debt results in liability under Section 138 of the NI Act.
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....
The presumption under Section 139 of the NI Act obligates the accused to provide credible evidence to rebut the claim of issuance of a cheque for a legally enforceable debt.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the rebuttable nature of the presumption in favor of the holder of a cheque under Sections 118 and 139 of the N.I. Act, emphasizing the burden of p....
A drawer of a cheque is presumed liable unless they provide evidence to rebut the presumption of issuance for debt repayment, established under Sections 138 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
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.
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
