Is a Cheque a Legal Document? NI Act Insights

2025 0 Supreme(Kar) 818

In the cross-examination, he admits that he did not count the amount whether it was Rs.3,00,000/- and except the Cheque, no other document was obtained at the time of transaction and he admits that he is a tenant of the complainant. 16. ... Whether the Trial Court committed an error in acquitting the accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I. Act in accepting the defence of the accused and wheth....

2022 0 Supreme(Kar) 1258

The issue question is whether the cheque issued by the accused for discharging the liability or not. Therefore, considering the same, the trial Court has rightly held that the issuance of cheque-Ex.P.1 is not disputed by the accused and also the signature. ... The point that arise for my consideration is : "Whether the document-Ex.P.12 is required to be referred to the FSL for getting expert opinion and ....

2023 0 Supreme(MP) 522

The question before this Court is that whether there was a presumption with regard to a debt upon the respondent and secondly, whether the said presumption was rebutted by the respondent. ... The cheque was deposited on 16.04.2005 and it was dishonored on 18.04.2005 as reflected by the cheque return memo. ... The petitioner is the holder of cheque issued by the respondent Deepak Marothiya. ... The objecti....

2022 0 Supreme(Del) 818

The alleged cheque return memo is an incomplete document and moreover the reason given for the cheque bounce is not covered under section 138 of the NI Act. ... The respondent no. 2 has not filed original cheque return memo and the document so submitted by the respondent no. 2 is an internal document of the bank which was not certified by the Banker under the provisions of the Bankers Bo....

Fry,3 the High Court held that in determining whether a document is sufficiently stamped for the purpose of deciding upon its admissibility in evidence you must look at the document itself as it stands, and not at any collateral circumstances which may be proved in evidence. ... A cheque has not to be stamped as a bill of exchange because it happens to be postponed; a document has to be stamped accord....

2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 56763

Though a document is seen to have been shown to the complainant, while he was being cross-examined as PW1, the said document was not even marked. Therefore, this Court cannot rely upon such a document. ... The question whether the cheque was issued as security, put to the complainant during his cross-examination by itself cannot rebut the presumption under Section 139 of the NI Act. The trial court, fai....

2023 0 Supreme(Ker) 1051

In the second and third pages of that document, the 1st respondent did not affix his signature. That fact was not reckoned with by the courts below while placing reliance on the said document. ... Even if the details in the cheque have not been filled up by the drawer, but by another person, this is not relevant to the defence whether cheque was issued towards payment of a debt or in discharge of a liabil....

2023 0 Supreme(All) 1153

From perusal of the aforesaid provision, the intention of legislation is very much clear i.e. to verify the fact as to whether the cheque was produced before the Bank and dishonoured for some reasons or not. ... If the cheque return memo is not bearing any official stamp of the bank, it does not render the cheque return memo as invalid or illegal. The cheque return memo is not a document....

2025 0 Supreme(Ker) 2519

The accused has a case that a blank cheque was handed over to her uncle, and the same was misused by the accused. The first question to be decided is whether the presumption under Section 139 of the NI Act is applicable as far as a cash cheque is concerned. ... Whether the presumption under section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is available in a prosecution based on a “cash cheque” is the question....

2023 0 Supreme(Cal) 924

The document Ext. “B” was signed on 12.4.2010 and the cheque was issued on 10.04.2010. ... There is no reflection in the said agreement as to whether any amount has been paid in advance or kept as security. ... Learned Magistrate also observed that complainant during cross-examination voluntarily stated that there was a separate demand of Rs.10,00,000/-through cheque but no such document was produced befo....

2019 0 Supreme(P&H) 1599

Wherever the Act talks of liabilities on the basis of Negotiable Instruments, it has emphasised only on the fact that the drawer or endorser has signed the document. Hence, this Court is of the opinion that the fact that the body of the cheque is not filled up by the drawer of the cheque, is totally immaterial in a trial for offence under Section 138 of NI Act. This strand of intention of legislature can be very well gathered from the other provisions of the Act as well. Once the che....

2018 0 Supreme(P&H) 1849

It is established on the record that cheque is a forged or fabricated document. It is the case of the accused that the cheque was stolen and signatures of accused Surinder Kumar were forged on the cheque. Though such presumption is rebuttable but I do find that accused have been able to rebut the said presumption.

2017 0 Supreme(Mad) 790

The Plaintiff had utilised one of the unused and damaged cheque leaves found in the original documents from the Bank and given to the Plaintiff. It had been therefore stated that the suit has to be dismissed as there was no cause of action for the suit against the Defendants. The signature in the cheque is a forged signature and the document is a concocted document. 6 On consideration of the pleadings, the court below had framed the following issues:-

2016 0 Supreme(Kar) 360

Though the cases were decided by independent judgments, the reasoning was identical, in that, the findings were in favour of the complainant. And on that ground alone, the respondent was acquitted. The same was carried in appeal before a learned Single Judge of this court, before whom the appeal was contested. The trial court came to a conclusion that the so-called cheque issued did not answer to the description of a cheque since the same was drawn on a cooperative society, which had....

2015 0 Supreme(Mad) 1055

No doubt, it is true that in the cheque, payee's name was written in one ink and the remaining body of the cheque was written in another ink. On that ground, it cannot be presumed that the cheque is not a valid document. Though the appellant/complainant did not produce a pro-note alleged to have been executed by the respondent for having received Rs.3,00,000/- on 17.5.2002 and also failed to produce the Day Book Ledger and other account books though summoned, on that ground, ....