NI Act
Dishonour of Cheque – S. 141 NI Act| Complainant only supposed to have general knowledge of person(s) in charge of company/firm; Burden on Director/Partner to prove their innocence: SC
“Quashing of a complaint is a serious matter. Complaint cannot be quashed for the asking. For quashing of a complaint, it must be shown that no offence is made out at all against the Director or Partner.”
Can accused be tried under NI Act as well as under IPC on similar set of allegations or will it amount to double jeopardy? Larger SC bench to decide
Supreme Court: The bench of SA Nazeer and JK Maheshwari*, JJ has called upon a larger bench to decide if on similar
Right to cross-examination cannot be denied as a punishment for failure to deposit interim compensation under Section 143A NI Act: Supreme Court
Supreme Court: In a case where an offender under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI Act) was denied the
Whether concurrent prosecutions under S. 138, NI Act and S. 420, IPC, will amount to double jeopardy? J&K and Ladakh HC analyses
Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court: While deciding the instant petitions, the question that came up before that Court
Allahabad High Court | Sections 4 & 5 CrPC only applicable to proceedings under Special Acts; not when criminal jurisdiction is invoked
Allahabad High Court: The Division Bench of Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker and Gautam Chowdhary, JJ. dismissed a petition which was filed praying
Dishonour of cheque| Partner cannot be held to be vicariously liable when partnership firm is not tried as primary offender: SC
Supreme Court: Explaining the law on vicarious liability under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the bench of Ajay Rastogi and Sanjiv Khanna*,
Obligation of Thumb Impression and Signature, both, for a Pro-Note under Negotiable Instruments Act: Mandatory or Not? Read Madras HC’s verdict
Madras High Court: Teekaa Raman, J., observed that there is no mandatory provision under the Negotiable Instruments Act that both the signature
Ori HC considers whether any difference exists between a case where default is committed and prosecution immediately launched and where prosecution is deferred till cheque presented again gets dishonored for second or successive time?
Orissa High Court: R K Pattnaik, J. dismissed the petition and held that the ground on which the petition is raised is
Whether dishonour of cheques could have only given a cause of action to register an FIR for an offence under S. 420 IPC? MP HC answers
Madhya Pradesh High Court: Atul Sreedharan, J. allowed a petition which was filed for quashing of Crime which was registered for an
[NI Act] Kar HC decides contours of law in a classic case where cash of Rs 2 crore was borrowed as hand loan and a cheque obtained for the repayment of the same got dishonoured
Karnataka High Court: M. Nagaprasanna, J. allowed the petition and quashed the impugned order regarding attachment of property and auction notification. The
Explained| Section 138 NI Act: Is the ‘debt incurred after the drawing of the cheque but before its encashment’ excluded from ‘debt or any other liability’?
Supreme Court: Explaining the scope of the term ‘debt or any other liability’ under Section 138 of the NI Act, the bench
J&K and Ladakh HC | Dishonour of cheque; HC advices Criminal Courts to impose fine equivalent to amount of cheque plus at least 6% interest per annum
Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court: Sanjeev Kumar, J., held that the sentence of fine under Section 138 of N.I.Act must
Ker HC | Absence of salutation like M/s, Mr or Miss while drawing a cheque is immaterial for offence under S. 138 of NI Act; HC sets aside the acquittal, directs Trial Court to re-address the issue
Kerala High Court: Gopinath P., J., held that adding or omitting prefix like M/s, Mr And Mrs. while drawing the cheque is
Section 138 NI Act| Once settlement has been entered into, the complainant cannot pursue the original complaint: Supreme Court
The settlement agreement subsumes the original complaint.
All HC | Can complaint under S. 138 NI Act be quashed for failure to disclose date of service of notice? Court says it is a matter of evidence
Allahabad High Court: Vivek Varma, J., refused to quash a complaint case filed under Section 138 NI Act and directed the trial
‘Section 138 NI Act proceeding a “civil sheep” in a “criminal wolf’s” clothing’; quasi criminal proceedings against corporate debtor covered under Section 14(1)(a) IBC : SC
“A Section 138 proceeding can be said to be a “civil sheep” in a “criminal wolf’s” clothing, as it is the interest of the victim that is sought to be protected, the larger interest of the State being subsumed in the victim alone moving a court in cheque bouncing cases.”
Is issuance of blank cheque and signed blank stamp paper sufficient to attract presumption under S. 139 of NI Act? Supreme Court answers
Supreme Court: The 3-Judge Bench comprising of N.V. Ramana, Surya Kant* and Aniruddha Bose, JJ., upheld the judgement of High Court of
Del HC | Onus to prove that there is non-existence of debt is on whom under NI Act? Read the purpose of S. 118 NI Act
Delhi High Court: Subramonium Prasad, J., addressed a matter wherein it was reiterated that the initial burden of proving the burden of
P&H HC | Is there any provision of Negotiable Instruments Act that refers to any pre-condition for availing a valuable right of first appeal? HC elaborates
Punjab and Haryana High Court: Gurvinder Singh Gill, J., observed that, Right to appeal against conviction is an invaluable statutory right vested upon