Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
J.M.KHAZI
N. Chandra Reddy, S/o Chinnappa Reddy – Appellant
Versus
T.Damodara Reddy – Respondent
ORDER :
J.M.KHAZI, J.
These two petitions filed under Section 397 r/w Section 401 of Cr.P.C are by the accused, wherein he has challenged the concurrent findings of the trial Court and Sessions Court convicting him for the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, (for short N.I.Act) and also the order of the Sessions Court enhancing the punishment.
2. Since these two petitions are arising out of the same judgment and order of the trial Court and common judgment and order passed by the Sessions Court, exercising the appeal jurisdiction and involve common discussion, they are clubbed together and disposed of by common order.
3. For the sake of convenience, parties are referred to by their ranks before the trial Court.
4. Complainant filed a complaint under Section 200 of Cr.P.C, against the accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I Act, contending that he and accused are known to each other since more than 10 years. On 15.09.2014, accused borrowed hand loan of Rs.3,88,000/- and it was paid by the complainant through cheque No.727282. Similarly, on 08.10.2015, accused borrowed sum of Rs.9,70,000/- and the said payment was made by the complain
The court ruled that the presumption of legitimacy in cheque transactions places the burden on the accused to prove otherwise, highlighting the need for substantial evidence in defense claims of dish....
The court emphasized the importance of substantiated evidence in rebutting the presumption under Section 139 of the N.I. Act and upheld the conviction based on the evidence presented.
The presumption of a legally recoverable debt under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act can only be rebutted by the accused through credible evidence, which was found lacking.
The provisions of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act apply when issued cheques are dishonored due to insufficient funds, thus reinforcing the legal obligation of repayment.
The presumption of debt under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act operates in favor of the complainant, requiring the accused to provide contrary evidence to escape liability.
The court established that once a cheque is issued and signed, a legal presumption exists regarding its use for a valid debt, shifting the burden of proof to the accused to deny its validity.
The issuance of a bounced cheque towards a legally dischargeable debt constitutes an offense under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The presumption in favor of the complainant under Sec....
The burden of proof in dishonor cases under the N.I. Act shifts to the accused upon issuance of the cheque, and can be rebutted through evidence and inconsistencies by the complainant.
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
