Back
T. AMARNATH GOUD
Sudip Paul – Appellant
Versus
Sujata Saha – Respondent
JUDGMENT & ORDER [ORAL]
1. Heard Mr. Ratan Datta, learned Public Prosecutor and Mr. R. G. Chakraborty, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
2. This criminal appeal has been filed under Section- 378(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure is directed against the judgment and order dated 04.01.2021, passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, West Tripura, Agartala in connection with Case No. N.I. 309 of 2014, whereby and whereunder, the learned Court below acquitted the respondent No.1 for committing offence punishable under Section-138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881.
3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that the respondent-accused No.1 had issued a cheque bearing No.153014 dated 11.09.2014 drawn on Stae Bank of India, Agartala Bazar Branch amounting to Rs.10,00,000 in favour of the complainant-appellant herein for discharge of her debt from her account No.30283542935 and the complainant had presented the said cheque in U.C.O Bank, Agartala Branch on 12.09.2014 but the said cheque was bounced on 15.09.2014 unpaid due to refer to drawer. Thereafter, the complainantappellant herein, had informed the respondent-accused person about the returned of her cheque w
The presumption under Sections 118(a) and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act does not absolve the complainant from proving the existence of the loan beyond reasonable doubt.
Presumption under NI Act ss.118/139 rebuttable by evidence of complainant's lack of financial capacity via cross-examination; no appellate interference with reasonable acquittal; IT Act s.269SS viola....
The main legal point established in this judgment is that under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, there is a presumption that a cheque is issued for the discharge of a debt or liability.....
Admission of cheque execution raises presumption under Sections 118(a) and 139 NI Act of legally enforceable debt; rebuttable by preponderance of probabilities. Firm signatory liable under Section 14....
The presumption of consideration under the Negotiable Instruments Act can be rebutted by the accused through a preponderance of probabilities, shifting the burden back to the complainant to prove the....
The presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is mandatory, placing the burden on the accused to rebut the existence of a legally enforceable debt.
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
