{"id":211935,"date":"2019-03-13T12:00:15","date_gmt":"2019-03-13T06:30:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=211935"},"modified":"2019-03-16T12:44:22","modified_gmt":"2019-03-16T07:14:22","slug":"cal-hc-authorised-signatory-not-to-be-prosecuted-under-s-138-ni-act-if-the-company-not-arraigned-as-accused","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/13\/cal-hc-authorised-signatory-not-to-be-prosecuted-under-s-138-ni-act-if-the-company-not-arraigned-as-accused\/","title":{"rendered":"Cal HC | Authorised signatory not to be prosecuted under S. 138 NI Act if the company not arraigned as accused"},"content":{"rendered":"

Calcutta High Court:\u00a0<\/strong>Asha Arora, J., allowed a criminal revision petition filed against the order of conviction and sentence awarded to the petitioners for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (dishonour of cheque).<\/em><\/p>\n

To cut the matter short, the present\u00a0was a cheque bounce matter. The complainants had filed under Section 138 against the petitioners alleging that Alok Bhagat (Petitioner 2), who was the authorised signatory of Adeptics, a partnership firm, issued a cheque for Rs 1.5 lakhs for receiving goods from complainant’s factory. However, when presented\u00a0to the bank, the said cheque got dishonoured with the endorsement–payment stopped by the drawer. A demand notice was sent but the petitioners failed to make payment. The matter went to trial and the petitioners were convicted and sentenced. In the appeal, their conviction was maintained but the sentence was modified. Aggrieved still, the petitioners filed the present revision petition.<\/p>\n

The petitioners were represented by Ayan Bhattacharya, Ozair Elahi and Sharequl Haque, Advocates. It was pointed out that the cheque was issued by the firm and signed by Mr Bhagat as an authorised signatory. It was argued that to fasten liability upon the partners\/directors of a firm\/company, impleading it as an accused is imperative. Per contra, Kajal Mukherjee, Surajit Basu and Bikash Chakraborty, Advocates appearing for the complainant opposed the present petition.<\/p>\n

The High Court noted that the cheque does not show that it was issued by Mr Bhagat\u00a0in his personal capacity. It was signed on behalf of the firm as authorised signatory. After discussing Sections 7 and 138 along with\u00a0Aneeta Hada v. Godfather Travels and tours (P) Ltd.,\u00a0<\/em>(2012) 5 SCC 661<\/a>, the High Court observed,\u00a0“Curiously enough, though the cheque clearly shows that it was issued on behalf of Adeptees, no notice of demand was served on the said firm and the complaint was filed only against the petitioners without the mandatory\u00a0requirement of impleading the company\/firm as one of the accused.”\u00a0<\/strong>Complainants argued that no such plea was taken before the trial court or the lower appellate court. However, relying\u00a0on Ajit Balse v. Ranga Karkare,\u00a0<\/em>(2015) 15 SCC 748<\/a>, the High Court rejected the argument. Resultantly, the revision petition was allowed and the impugned judgments were set aside. [N.K.Bhagat v. Biswanath Dey, 2019 SCC OnLine Cal 326<\/b><\/a>, dated 11-03-2019]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Calcutta High Court:\u00a0Asha Arora, J., allowed a criminal revision petition filed against the order of conviction and sentence awarded to the petitioners <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":52131,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[34304,2862,33230],"class_list":["post-211935","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-cheque-bounce-matter","tag-dishonour_of_cheque","tag-section-138-of-the-negotiable-instruments-act"],"yoast_head":"\nCal HC | Authorised signatory not to be prosecuted under S. 138 NI Act if the company not arraigned as accused | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/13\/cal-hc-authorised-signatory-not-to-be-prosecuted-under-s-138-ni-act-if-the-company-not-arraigned-as-accused\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Cal HC | Authorised signatory not to be prosecuted under S. 138 NI Act if the company not arraigned as accused\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Calcutta High Court:\u00a0Asha Arora, J., allowed a criminal revision petition filed against the order of conviction and sentence awarded to the petitioners\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/13\/cal-hc-authorised-signatory-not-to-be-prosecuted-under-s-138-ni-act-if-the-company-not-arraigned-as-accused\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2019-03-13T06:30:15+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-03-16T07:14:22+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/13\/cal-hc-authorised-signatory-not-to-be-prosecuted-under-s-138-ni-act-if-the-company-not-arraigned-as-accused\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/13\/cal-hc-authorised-signatory-not-to-be-prosecuted-under-s-138-ni-act-if-the-company-not-arraigned-as-accused\/\",\"name\":\"Cal HC | Authorised signatory not to be prosecuted under S. 138 NI Act if the company not arraigned as accused | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/13\/cal-hc-authorised-signatory-not-to-be-prosecuted-under-s-138-ni-act-if-the-company-not-arraigned-as-accused\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/13\/cal-hc-authorised-signatory-not-to-be-prosecuted-under-s-138-ni-act-if-the-company-not-arraigned-as-accused\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2019-03-13T06:30:15+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-16T07:14:22+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/13\/cal-hc-authorised-signatory-not-to-be-prosecuted-under-s-138-ni-act-if-the-company-not-arraigned-as-accused\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/13\/cal-hc-authorised-signatory-not-to-be-prosecuted-under-s-138-ni-act-if-the-company-not-arraigned-as-accused\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/13\/cal-hc-authorised-signatory-not-to-be-prosecuted-under-s-138-ni-act-if-the-company-not-arraigned-as-accused\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":887},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/13\/cal-hc-authorised-signatory-not-to-be-prosecuted-under-s-138-ni-act-if-the-company-not-arraigned-as-accused\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Cal HC | Authorised signatory not to be prosecuted under S. 138 NI Act if the company not arraigned as accused\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Cal HC | Authorised signatory not to be prosecuted under S. 138 NI Act if the company not arraigned as accused | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/13\/cal-hc-authorised-signatory-not-to-be-prosecuted-under-s-138-ni-act-if-the-company-not-arraigned-as-accused\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Cal HC | Authorised signatory not to be prosecuted under S. 138 NI Act if the company not arraigned as accused","og_description":"Calcutta High Court:\u00a0Asha Arora, J., allowed a criminal revision petition filed against the order of conviction and sentence awarded to the petitioners","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/13\/cal-hc-authorised-signatory-not-to-be-prosecuted-under-s-138-ni-act-if-the-company-not-arraigned-as-accused\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2019-03-13T06:30:15+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-03-16T07:14:22+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/13\/cal-hc-authorised-signatory-not-to-be-prosecuted-under-s-138-ni-act-if-the-company-not-arraigned-as-accused\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/13\/cal-hc-authorised-signatory-not-to-be-prosecuted-under-s-138-ni-act-if-the-company-not-arraigned-as-accused\/","name":"Cal HC | Authorised signatory not to be prosecuted under S. 138 NI Act if the company not arraigned as accused | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/13\/cal-hc-authorised-signatory-not-to-be-prosecuted-under-s-138-ni-act-if-the-company-not-arraigned-as-accused\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/13\/cal-hc-authorised-signatory-not-to-be-prosecuted-under-s-138-ni-act-if-the-company-not-arraigned-as-accused\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg","datePublished":"2019-03-13T06:30:15+00:00","dateModified":"2019-03-16T07:14:22+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/13\/cal-hc-authorised-signatory-not-to-be-prosecuted-under-s-138-ni-act-if-the-company-not-arraigned-as-accused\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/13\/cal-hc-authorised-signatory-not-to-be-prosecuted-under-s-138-ni-act-if-the-company-not-arraigned-as-accused\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/13\/cal-hc-authorised-signatory-not-to-be-prosecuted-under-s-138-ni-act-if-the-company-not-arraigned-as-accused\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg","width":1330,"height":887},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/13\/cal-hc-authorised-signatory-not-to-be-prosecuted-under-s-138-ni-act-if-the-company-not-arraigned-as-accused\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Cal HC | Authorised signatory not to be prosecuted under S. 138 NI Act if the company not arraigned as accused"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":261806,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/16\/dishonour-of-cheque-8\/","url_meta":{"origin":211935,"position":0},"title":"Can only a sole proprietor be held liable under S. 138 NI Act for dishonour of cheque drawn on account of sole proprietorship concern? Tis Hazari Court decodes","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"February 16, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi: While deciding a matter under Section 138 of the negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Devanshu Sajlan, MM-05 (NI Act) reiterated the settled position of law that there is no concept of vicarious liability in case of a sole proprietorship concern since a sole proprietorship concern does\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Tis-hazari","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/Tis-hazari.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/Tis-hazari.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/Tis-hazari.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/Tis-hazari.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/Tis-hazari.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":267807,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/06\/03\/dishonour-of-cheque-section-138-ni-act-delhi-high-court-law-legal-news-legal-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":211935,"position":1},"title":"Presumption against signatory of a Cheque, Plea of lost cheque to be proved at trial: Del HC refuse quashing of summoning order for S. 138 NI Act offence","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"June 3, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: Asha Menon, J. refused to allow a petition filed under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of summoning order passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate, Patiala House Courts in complaint filed by the respondents 1 and 2 against the petitioner under Section 138 read with Section 142 of the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/DelPresump.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/DelPresump.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/DelPresump.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/DelPresump.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/DelPresump.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":264418,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/25\/dishonour-of-cheque-9\/","url_meta":{"origin":211935,"position":2},"title":"Dishonour of Cheque | If a cheque is not honoured by issuer and even after a legal notice he doesn\u2019t pay, he is bound to face criminal trial: Del HC","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"March 25, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: Rajnish Bhatnagar, J., dismissed a matter revolving around the dishonour of cheque under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Background Respondent 2 had filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable instruments Act, 1881 against the revisionist stating that he had taken a friendly loan\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Delhi_New-logo.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Delhi_New-logo.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Delhi_New-logo.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Delhi_New-logo.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Delhi_New-logo.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":286710,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/03\/11\/ni-act-cheque-bounce-notice-explainer-legal-research-knowledge\/","url_meta":{"origin":211935,"position":3},"title":"Section 138 of NI Act, 1881: All you need to know about Cheque Bounce Notice","author":"Ridhi","date":"March 11, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"A cheque bounce notice lays the foundation of a Court case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Explore the rules, format, and frequently asked questions around the legal notice for cheque bounce.","rel":"","context":"In "Law made Easy"","block_context":{"text":"Law made Easy","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/law-made-easy\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"cheque bounce notice","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-700.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-700.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-700.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-700.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":259847,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/11\/s-138-ni-telangana-hc-a-joint-account-holder-cannot-be-prosecuted-unless-and-until-he-she-is-a-signatory-to-subject-cheque\/","url_meta":{"origin":211935,"position":4},"title":"[S. 138 NI] Telangana HC | A joint account holder cannot be prosecuted unless and until he\/she is a signatory to subject cheque","author":"Editor","date":"January 11, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Telangana High Court: Shameem Akhter J. allowed criminal petition and quashed the proceedings against the petitioner\/A.2 on the ground that it is only the drawer of the cheque who can be proceeded. The instant Criminal under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 i.e. 'Cr.P.C.' was filed by\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":71821,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/09\/20\/dishonour-of-post-dated-cheque-for-discharge-of-existing-liability-is-covered-by-section-138-of-the-negotiable-instruments-act-1881\/","url_meta":{"origin":211935,"position":5},"title":"Dishonour of Post-dated cheque for discharge of existing liability is covered by Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"September 20, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: In the matter where the question as to whether the dishonour of a post-dated cheque given for repayment of loan installment which is also described as \u201csecurity\u201d in the loan agreement is covered by Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, was before the bench of Dipak\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/211935","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=211935"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/211935\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/52131"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=211935"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=211935"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=211935"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}