{"id":250414,"date":"2021-06-29T09:00:21","date_gmt":"2021-06-29T03:30:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=250414"},"modified":"2021-07-09T10:56:58","modified_gmt":"2021-07-09T05:26:58","slug":"section-138-ni-act-7","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/29\/section-138-ni-act-7\/","title":{"rendered":"Del HC | Can mere ipse dixit and statement in defence under S. 313 CrPC rebut presumption cast under S. 139 NI Act? Read on"},"content":{"rendered":"

Delhi High Court: <\/strong>Subramonium Prasad, J., addressed a matter with regard to offences under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.<\/p>\n

Instant revision petition was filed against the decision passed by the Additional Sessions Judge dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner and affirming the Judgment of Metropolitan Magistrate convicting petitioner for offences under Section 138 of Negotiable instruments Act.<\/p>\n

Respondent 2 instituted a complaint against the petitioner for an offence punishable under Section 138 NI Act.<\/p>\n

Petitioner submitted that he was to procure material for assembling the computers for supply to the complainant and the cheque was given as a security for the loan which was to be arranged by the complainant from other parties.<\/p>\n

Analysis, Law and Decision<\/u><\/span><\/h3>\n

Bench noted that the acknowledged receipt stated that the petitioner had taken a loan of Rs 15,00,000 and in lieu of the loan he issued a cheque. The said receipt was signed by the petitioner.<\/p>\n

Court for the above-stated decided that the fact that there was no witnesses and the fact that it does not state as to from whom the loan was being taken doesn\u2019t persuade the Court to disbelieve the document.<\/p>\n

The said cheque was returned with endorsement \u201cInsufficient Funds\u201d. <\/em><\/p>\n

Receipt along with cheque made out a case under Section 138 NI Act. Presumption under Section 139 of the N.I. Act, therefore, arises in favour of the holder of the cheque i.e. the complainant and unless the contrary is proved, that the complainant has received the cheque for discharge, in whole or in part, of any debt or other liability.<\/p>\n

Bench stated that the petitioner couldn\u2019t rebut the presumption under Section 139 NI Act. He didn\u2019t deny his signatures on the cheque and did not deny the fact that the receipt was given by him which acknowledged a sum of Rs 15,00,000 taken as a loan.<\/p>\n

Further, it was also added that the mere ipse dixit of the petitioner and the statement in defence under Section 313 CrPC without any material does not rebut the presumption cast on the petitioner under Section 139 of the N.I. Act.<\/p>\n

The fact that the loan was given in violation of Section 269 SS of IT Act does not mean that the Court cannot look into the documents at all.<\/p>\n

Offence Section 269 SS IT Act at best makes an offence under Section 271 D of the IT Act but it does not mean that the loan of Rs.15,00,000\/- has not been given by the complainant to the petitioner herein.<\/em>\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

High Court agreed with the Courts below that the initial burden cast against the petitioner had not been discharged.<\/p>\n

In view of the above revision, the petition was dismissed. [Barun Kumar v. State of NCT of Delhi, 2021 SCC OnLine Del 3498<\/b><\/a>, decided 25-06-2021]<\/p>\n

\n

Advocates before the Court:<\/strong><\/p>\n

For the Petitioner: Mr. Dheeraj Malhotra and Mr.Gaurav Gupta, Advocates<\/span><\/p>\n

For the Respondents: Mr Hirein Sharma, APP for the State Mr. Shakeel Sarwar Wani and <\/span>Mr. Himanshu Garg for respondents No.2 to 4<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Delhi High Court: Subramonium Prasad, J., addressed a matter with regard to offences under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Instant <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[2543,29785,23584,33580,32303],"class_list":["post-250414","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-Delhi_High_Court","tag-law","tag-section-138-ni-act","tag-section-139-ni-act","tag-section-313-crpc"],"yoast_head":"\nDel HC | Can mere ipse dixit and statement in defence under S. 313 CrPC rebut presumption cast under S. 139 NI Act? Read on | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Section 138 NI Act\" \/>\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\/2021\/06\/29\/section-138-ni-act-7\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Del HC | Can mere ipse dixit and statement in defence under S. 313 CrPC rebut presumption cast under S. 139 NI Act? Read on\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Section 138 NI Act\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/29\/section-138-ni-act-7\/\" \/>\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=\"2021-06-29T03:30:21+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2021-07-09T05:26:58+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Delhi-HC.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1329\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"888\" \/>\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=\"3 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\/2021\/06\/29\/section-138-ni-act-7\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/29\/section-138-ni-act-7\/\",\"name\":\"Del HC | Can mere ipse dixit and statement in defence under S. 313 CrPC rebut presumption cast under S. 139 NI Act? Read on | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2021-06-29T03:30:21+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2021-07-09T05:26:58+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"description\":\"Section 138 NI Act\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/29\/section-138-ni-act-7\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/29\/section-138-ni-act-7\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/29\/section-138-ni-act-7\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Del HC | Can mere ipse dixit and statement in defence under S. 313 CrPC rebut presumption cast under S. 139 NI Act? Read on\"}]},{\"@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":"Del HC | Can mere ipse dixit and statement in defence under S. 313 CrPC rebut presumption cast under S. 139 NI Act? Read on | SCC Times","description":"Section 138 NI Act","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\/2021\/06\/29\/section-138-ni-act-7\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Del HC | Can mere ipse dixit and statement in defence under S. 313 CrPC rebut presumption cast under S. 139 NI Act? Read on","og_description":"Section 138 NI Act","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/29\/section-138-ni-act-7\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2021-06-29T03:30:21+00:00","article_modified_time":"2021-07-09T05:26:58+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1329,"height":888,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Delhi-HC.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/29\/section-138-ni-act-7\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/29\/section-138-ni-act-7\/","name":"Del HC | Can mere ipse dixit and statement in defence under S. 313 CrPC rebut presumption cast under S. 139 NI Act? Read on | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2021-06-29T03:30:21+00:00","dateModified":"2021-07-09T05:26:58+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"description":"Section 138 NI Act","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/29\/section-138-ni-act-7\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/29\/section-138-ni-act-7\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/29\/section-138-ni-act-7\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Del HC | Can mere ipse dixit and statement in defence under S. 313 CrPC rebut presumption cast under S. 139 NI Act? Read on"}]},{"@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":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"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":250414,"position":0},"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":312019,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/23\/no-conviction-solely-based-on-accuseds-statements-under-section-313-of-crpc-calcutta-high-court-scc-blog\/","url_meta":{"origin":250414,"position":1},"title":"\u2018No conviction solely based on accused\u2019s statements under Section 313 of CrPC\u2019; Calcutta High Court sets aside conviction","author":"Ritu","date":"January 23, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Calcutta High Court noted that the impugned notice has not been produced before the Court, thus not proved, the case's foundation is wrong and thus not maintainable.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"calcutta high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":209495,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/02\/05\/del-hc-no-reason-to-stay-proceedings-under-s-138-ni-act-where-trial-in-another-fir-involving-the-parties-is-pending\/","url_meta":{"origin":250414,"position":2},"title":"Del HC | No reason to stay proceedings under S. 138 NI Act where trial in another FIR involving the parties is pending","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"February 5, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: R.K. Gauba, J. allowed a petition filed against the order of Sessions Court whereby proceedings in a case filed under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 were stayed. Petitioner had filed a case against respondents alleging commission\u00a0of an offence under Section 138. It was alleged that\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":221639,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/11\/01\/del-limitation-provided-under-s-468-crpc-not-applicable-to-s-138-ni-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":250414,"position":3},"title":"Del HC | Limitation provided under S. 468 CrPC not applicable to S. 138 NI Act","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"November 1, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court:\u00a0Suresh Kumar Kait, J., dismissed a criminal petition wherein the petitioner sought quashing of the summoning order passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate and also the criminal complaint under Section 138 read with 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The petitioner represented by Ehraz Zafar, Akash Tyagi and\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":287047,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/03\/16\/delhi-high-court-considers-applicability-of-section-219-crpc-in-checque-bounce-cases-issues-notice-to-nctd-legal-news-legal-research-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":250414,"position":4},"title":"Delhi High Court considers multiplicity of cheque bounce cases vis-a-vis Section 219 CrPC; issues notice to NCTD","author":"Editor","date":"March 16, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"It was alleged that each alleged \u2018dishonour\u2019 comprised of a separate offence and even if committed on the same date (i.e., within the same year), not more than 03 such offences can be tried by way of a single complaint in view of section 219 Cr.P.C. There is no legal\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Delhi High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-472.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-472.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-472.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-472.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":243347,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/02\/04\/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\/","url_meta":{"origin":250414,"position":5},"title":"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","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"February 4, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: Subramonium Prasad, J., addressed a matter wherein it was reiterated that the initial burden of proving the burden of the non-existence of debt is on the accused under Section 118 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The instant revision petition was filed against the order passed dismissing 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":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/250414","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=250414"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/250414\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=250414"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=250414"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=250414"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}