{"id":94441,"date":"2016-12-27T10:24:30","date_gmt":"2016-12-27T04:54:30","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=94441"},"modified":"2017-01-04T13:02:10","modified_gmt":"2017-01-04T07:32:10","slug":"2016-scc-vol-10-december-21-2016-part-4","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/12\/27\/2016-scc-vol-10-december-21-2016-part-4\/","title":{"rendered":"2016 SCC Vol. 10 December 21, 2016 Part 4"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 \u2014 S. 138 \u2014 Post-dated cheque described as \u2018security\u2019 towards repayment of instalment of already disbursed loan amount:<\/strong> Proceedings under S. 138, maintainable in case of dishonour of post-dated cheque described as \u2018security\u2019 towards repayment of instalment of already disbursed loan amount such Cheque. Crucial point is whether cheque represents discharge of existing enforceable debt or liability or whether it represents advance payment without there being any subsisting liability. Once loan amount was disbursed and as per agreement, instalments had fallen due on date of issuance of cheque, dishonour of such cheque would fall under S. 138. Such issuance of cheque undoubtedly represents outstanding liability. [Sampelly Satyanarayana Rao v. Indian Renewable Energy Development Agency Ltd., <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/LoginForNewsLink\/2016_10_SCC_458\">(2016) 10 SCC 458<\/a>]<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Municipalities \u2014 Cantonment Boards \u2014 Electoral roll \u2014 Qualification for enrolment:<\/strong> Requirement under R. 10(3) to arrange names of electors according to house numbers is indicative of legally constructed houses. R. 10(3) is thus in conformity with S. 28 of Cantonments Act, 2006 which provides that person to be qualified for enrolment must be resident of house constructed legally i.e. with prior sanction of Board under S. 234, as illegal erection constitutes offence under S. 247 and liable to be demolished under S. 248. Word \u201cresident\u201d as defined under S. 2(zt) should receive narrow construction in comparison to wide definition of \u201cinhabitant\u201d under S. 2(zc) which would include persons residing illegal constructions also. Hence, persons living in illegally constructed houses in cantonment Area, not eligible to be included in electoral roll prepared under R. 10 of Cantonment Electoral Rules, 2007. [Sunil Kumar Kori v. Gopal Das Kabra, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/LoginForNewsLink\/2016_10_SCC_467\">(2016) 10 SCC 467<\/a>]<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Service Law \u2014 Recruitment Process \u2014 Fixation of benchmark:<\/strong> In light of disagreement at the Bench issue that prescribing 40% marks as minimum qualifying marks for interview after holding written exam but before conducting interview\/viva voce examination, whether amounts to change in criteria of selection in midst of selection, referred to larger Bench. [Salam Samarjeet Singh v. High Court of Manipur at Imphal, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/LoginForNewsLink\/2016_10_SCC_484\">(2016) 10 SCC 484<\/a>]<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Penal Code, 1860 \u2014 Ss. 376(2)(g)\/366\/392 r\/w S. 34 \u2014 Gang rape after abduction \u2014 Appreciation of evidence:<\/strong> As there was inconsistent testimony of prosecutrix and her conduct after alleged rape, dubious, also medical opinion belies allegation of gang rape, hence, plea of false implication cannot be discarded. Seizures effected by investigating agency also do not inspire confidence and charge also not proved beyond reasonable doubt, accused entitled to benefit of doubt. Therefore, reversal of acquittal by High Court, set aside and all accused acquitted. [Raja v. State of\u00a0Karnataka, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/LoginForNewsLink\/2016_10_SCC_506\">(2016) 10 SCC 506<\/a>]<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Penal Code, 1860 \u2014 S. 302 \u2014 Murder trial \u2014 Circumstantial evidence:<\/strong> In this case where was wife allegedly strangulated to death by husband and then hanged, in his house, as links in the chain of circumstantial evidence, not established, accused entitled to benefit of doubt. Hence, conviction reversed. [Jose v. Sub-Inspector of Police, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/LoginForNewsLink\/2016_10_SCC_519\">(2016) 10 SCC 519<\/a>]<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Criminal Trial \u2014 Proof \u2014 Proof beyond reasonable doubt:<\/strong> Burden of proof is always on prosecution and accused is presumed to be innocent unless proved guilty. Prosecution has to prove its\u00a0case beyond reasonable doubt and accused is entitled to benefit of reasonable doubt. The reasonable doubt is one which occurs to a prudent and reasonable man. S. 3, Evidence Act, refers to two situations in which a fact is said to be proved: (i) when a person feels absolutely certain of a fact i.e. \u201cbelieves it to exist\u201d, and (ii) when he is not absolutely certain and thinks it so extremely probable that a prudent man would, under the circumstances, act on the assumption of its existence. The doubt which the law contemplates is not of a confused mind but of prudent man who is assumed to possess the capacity to separate the chaff from the grain. The degree of proof need not reach certainty but must carry a high degree of probability. [Bhagwan Jagannath Markad v. State of Maharashtra,<a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/LoginForNewsLink\/2016_10_SCC_537\"> (2016) 10 SCC 537]<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Constitution of India \u2014 Arts. 19(1)(g) &amp; (6) \u2014 Right to practise law \u2014 Fundamental right as to \u2014 Scope of:<\/strong> Challenge to constitutional validity of Rr. 3 and 3-A of Ch. XXIV of Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 on ground of unreasonable violation of right to practise law, rejected. [Jamshed Ansari v. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad,<a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/LoginForNewsLink\/2016_10_SCC_554\"> (2016) 10 SCC 554<\/a>]<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Contract and Specific Relief \u2014 Contractual Obligations and Rights \u2014 Variation clauses \u2014 Scope of work:<\/strong> As per the terms of the contract in the present case, when the contract period was extended obliged the contractor to fulfil all the contractual stipulations under the original agreement including to complete the assigned quantity of work, be it original quantity or extra quantity. [Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd. v. Dhansar Engg. Co. (P) Ltd., <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/LoginForNewsLink\/2016_10_SCC_571\">(2016) 10 SCC 571<\/a>]<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 (6 of 1941) \u2014 Ss. 4(6)(iii) and 5(6a) \u2014 Transfer\/return of Replenishment (REP) licence\/Exim scrip for cancellation to bank in terms of RBI directions \u2014 Exigibility of:<\/strong> When the initial issue or grant of scrips was not treated as transfer of title or ownership in the goods, as a natural corollary, it must follow that when RBI acquires and seeks the return of REP licences or Exim scrips with the intention to cancel and destroy them, the REP licences or Exim scrips would not be treated as marketable commodity purchased by the grantor. Thus, REP licences or Exim scrips, which are \u201cgoods\u201d, when transferred or assigned by the holder\/owner to a third person for consideration, would attract sales tax but not when the same are returned to the grantor or the sovereign authority for cancellation or extinction, they would not attract sales or purchase tax. [CTO v. SBI, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/LoginForNewsLink\/2016_10_SCC_595\">(2016) 10 SCC 595<\/a>]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 \u2014 S. 138 \u2014 Post-dated cheque described as \u2018security\u2019 towards repayment of instalment of already disbursed loan amount: <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":91,"featured_media":102451,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[5,16],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-94441","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casesreported","category-supremecourtcases"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>2016 SCC Vol. 10 December 21, 2016 Part 4 | 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\/2016\/12\/27\/2016-scc-vol-10-december-21-2016-part-4\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"2016 SCC Vol. 10 December 21, 2016 Part 4\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 \u2014 S. 138 \u2014 Post-dated cheque described as \u2018security\u2019 towards repayment of instalment of already disbursed loan amount:\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/12\/27\/2016-scc-vol-10-december-21-2016-part-4\/\" \/>\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=\"2016-12-27T04:54:30+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-01-04T07:32:10+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.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=\"Saba\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Saba\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 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\/2016\/12\/27\/2016-scc-vol-10-december-21-2016-part-4\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/12\/27\/2016-scc-vol-10-december-21-2016-part-4\/\",\"name\":\"2016 SCC Vol. 10 December 21, 2016 Part 4 | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/12\/27\/2016-scc-vol-10-december-21-2016-part-4\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/12\/27\/2016-scc-vol-10-december-21-2016-part-4\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2016-12-27T04:54:30+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-01-04T07:32:10+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/12\/27\/2016-scc-vol-10-december-21-2016-part-4\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/12\/27\/2016-scc-vol-10-december-21-2016-part-4\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/12\/27\/2016-scc-vol-10-december-21-2016-part-4\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":887},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/12\/27\/2016-scc-vol-10-december-21-2016-part-4\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"2016 SCC Vol. 10 December 21, 2016 Part 4\"}]},{\"@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\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785\",\"name\":\"Saba\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Saba\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_2\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"2016 SCC Vol. 10 December 21, 2016 Part 4 | 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\/2016\/12\/27\/2016-scc-vol-10-december-21-2016-part-4\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"2016 SCC Vol. 10 December 21, 2016 Part 4","og_description":"Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 \u2014 S. 138 \u2014 Post-dated cheque described as \u2018security\u2019 towards repayment of instalment of already disbursed loan amount:","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/12\/27\/2016-scc-vol-10-december-21-2016-part-4\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2016-12-27T04:54:30+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-01-04T07:32:10+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Saba","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Saba","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/12\/27\/2016-scc-vol-10-december-21-2016-part-4\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/12\/27\/2016-scc-vol-10-december-21-2016-part-4\/","name":"2016 SCC Vol. 10 December 21, 2016 Part 4 | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/12\/27\/2016-scc-vol-10-december-21-2016-part-4\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/12\/27\/2016-scc-vol-10-december-21-2016-part-4\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg","datePublished":"2016-12-27T04:54:30+00:00","dateModified":"2017-01-04T07:32:10+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/12\/27\/2016-scc-vol-10-december-21-2016-part-4\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/12\/27\/2016-scc-vol-10-december-21-2016-part-4\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/12\/27\/2016-scc-vol-10-december-21-2016-part-4\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg","width":1330,"height":887},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/12\/27\/2016-scc-vol-10-december-21-2016-part-4\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"2016 SCC Vol. 10 December 21, 2016 Part 4"}]},{"@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\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785","name":"Saba","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Saba"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_2\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"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":94441,"position":0},"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 &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","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":[]},{"id":256261,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/10\/29\/section-138-of-ni-act-security\/","url_meta":{"origin":94441,"position":1},"title":"Section 138 of NI Act| No hard and fast rule that a cheque issued as security can never be presented by drawee: Supreme Court\u00a0","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"October 29, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cA cheque issued as security pursuant to a financial transaction cannot be considered as a worthless piece of paper under every circumstance.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","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\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":258158,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/12\/06\/dishonour-of-cheque-6\/","url_meta":{"origin":94441,"position":2},"title":"When does burden of proof shift to accused to rebut statutory presumption in cheque bounce cases under S. 138 NI Act? CMM Court considers","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"December 6, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Court of XX Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City: Bhola Pandit, XX Addl. CMM, convicted a person who presented a cheque to repay a loan but the same was dishonored due to insufficient funds. Instant complaint was filed under Section 200 of Code of Criminal procedure against the accused of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","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\/2021\/05\/City-Civil-Court-Bengaluru.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/05\/City-Civil-Court-Bengaluru.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/05\/City-Civil-Court-Bengaluru.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/05\/City-Civil-Court-Bengaluru.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/05\/City-Civil-Court-Bengaluru.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":255614,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/10\/14\/law-on-dishonour-of-cheque\/","url_meta":{"origin":94441,"position":3},"title":"Law on Dishonour of Cheque | Loan given in cash, no documentary evidence available. Lender files a complaint under S. 138 NI Act: Read how \u2018presumption\u2019 under S. 118 (a) plays a role","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"October 14, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Patiala House Courts, New Delhi: Prayank Nayak, MM-01 acquitted the accused of offence under Section 138 (dishonour of cheque) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1885, holding that the accused successfully dislodged the statutory presumption. In the present matter, complaint was filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Patiala House Courts, Delhi","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/03\/patialacourt.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/03\/patialacourt.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/03\/patialacourt.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/03\/patialacourt.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/03\/patialacourt.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":258119,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/12\/04\/account-closed-and-cheque-returned\/","url_meta":{"origin":94441,"position":4},"title":"&#8220;Account closed&#8221; and Cheque returned: Is it a reason sufficient for convicting a person under S. 138 NI Act? Read detailed decision of CMM Court, Bangalore","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"December 4, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Court of XX Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru City: In light of cheque being returned by the bank due to \u201cAccount Closed\u201d Bhola Pandit, XX Addl. C.M.M, convicted an accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 The present complaint was filed under Section 200 of the Code\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","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\/2021\/05\/City-Civil-Court-Bengaluru.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/05\/City-Civil-Court-Bengaluru.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/05\/City-Civil-Court-Bengaluru.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/05\/City-Civil-Court-Bengaluru.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/05\/City-Civil-Court-Bengaluru.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":243703,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/02\/11\/madras-hc-if-wife-issues-a-cheque-to-discharge-husbands-liability-and-it-gets-dishonoured-can-the-wife-be-prosecuted-under-s-138-ni-act-hc-answers\/","url_meta":{"origin":94441,"position":5},"title":"Madras HC | If wife issues a cheque to discharge husband\u2019s liability and it gets dishonoured, can the wife be prosecuted under S. 138 NI Act? HC answers","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"February 11, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Madras High Court: P.N. Prakash, J., decided a criminal original petition addressing an issue with regard to an offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Sree Gokulam Chits and Finance Corporation Private Limited initiated prosecution in the Court of Judicial Magistrate for the offence under Section 138 of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","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\/94441","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\/91"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=94441"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/94441\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/102451"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=94441"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=94441"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=94441"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}