Skip to main content

DEFENCES IN A CHEQUE BOUNCE CASE

Hello friends, today we shall discuss some key aspects that can be used while defending a case filed against a person or an entity under the provisions of Sec 138 Negotiable Instrument Act, in other words, a cheque bounce case. In such cases, there is an initial presumption against the person who has issued a cheque that the same was issued by him in lieu of legal debt/lawful consideration. It means that firstly in such type of cases, the person against whom a case is filed, he has to rebut the presumption which has been drawn against him. If this has been done in first place, then the onus/burden again shifts upon the complainant and now he has to clear that doubt which the accused has raised by placing evidence on record. Thus, the initial thing which the accused has to do in such cases is to get himself absolved out of the initial presumption which has been made against him, which can be done by merely casting a doubt or loopholes in the case set out by the complainant and such doubt can be raised by the accused even without the need of filing his additional evidence. It can be created by creating doubts in the evidence brought by the complainant at the time of cross examination. Once this has been done, then later on it can be weighed that whether it is sufficient to get the case closed against the accused or if not then at later stage the accused might also file his evidence to bring some or the other relevant fact.


BASIC DEFENCE

1.  Complaint is bad due to point of jurisdiction—which means that where the complaint has been filed in court having no territorial jurisdiction. In simpler terms, as per recent amendments, the case of the dishonor of cheque can only be filed in a place where the bank of the complainant is situated. If it is seen that it is been filed at some other place, then it can be quashed.

2.     Notice not containing basic details—The filing of any cheque bounce case shall require prior sending of the demand notice in writing within the stipulated time as covered by the Act, and been explained in details in our previous blogs. Further, the notice must not contain the basic details like place of dishonor or cheque details, bank details etc, in such an event, it comprise of a valid defence.

3. Issue of limitation—It is another ground of defence to be looked in at the first place.

4.     In case the cheque has been issued for some other purpose or transaction, then it shall be brought to the notice of the court on first instance at the time of framing of notice.

5. Vicarious liability---It means that in case the concerned cheque has been issued by the company and the complainant has not made the company a party in the said proceedings, then also you can be absolved out of the said case.

6.Cross examination It means that the accused can at the first place have the option to cross examination the complainant in order to bring out the contradictions so as to cast the doubt about the sanctity of the said complaint.

 

I hope I have made myself clear about the initial defenses in cheque bounce case. For any query you can comment below.

 

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

MARRIAGE REGISTRATION PROCESS IN DELHI

 Hello friends today we shall talk about the procedure for registration of marriage in Delhi.   ELIGIBILITY The marriage must have been solemnized either under the Hindu Marriage Act or under the Special Marriage Act, The Groom must have attained the minimum age of 21 years. The bride must be of the age of 18 years at least.   DOCUMENTS REQUIRED Photo ID proofs of both the parties like Aadhar card / PAN card / Voter card Date of birth proofs of both parties like 10 th certificate, etc. Permanent address proof must be there . Marriage photographs and Invitation Card. Passport Size Photographs of both parties. 2 witness in case marriage registered under Hindu Marriage Act or 3 witnesses in case it is registered under the Special Marriage Act along with their respective proofs like PAN CARD/ AADHAR CARD etc. An affidavit from both parties certifying the date of their marriage and more specifically stating that the marriage has not been performed between pers...
1 comment
Read more

BENGALURU CONSUMER COURT IMPOSES PENALTY ON FLIPKART

RECENTLY BENGALURU DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM DIRECTED ONLINE MERCHANT FLIPKART TO REFUND AN ANOUNT OF RS. 13,999/- ALONGWITH COMPENSATION OF RS. 10,000/- TO A 80-YEAR OLD FOR CAUSING MENTAL AGONY. BRIEF FACTS An 80 -Year Old Consumer ordered a treadmill on the online site of Opposite Party Flipkart. In compliance the treadmill was delivered to the consumer. At the time of installation of the product, it was revealed by the technician that the treadmill is faulty. On coming to know that the consumer returned the product to Flipkart and sought replacement. Initially Flipkart failed to replace the product but in some time, the replaced product was delivered to consumer, however, despite requests they failed to send the technician. When consumer tried to fix the same on its own, it was found that the product was of some other company. In other words, it was not the same product which has been initially ordered by the consumer. With no resolution, the consumer was left with no other option bu...
Post a Comment
Read more

KERALA HIGH COURT BARS ENTRY OF 10 YEAR GIRL FROM ENTERING SABARIMALA TEMPLE

RECENTLY KERALA HIGH COURT DISMISSED WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER ARTICLE  226 OF CONSTITUTION FILED BY FATHER ON BEHALF OF HIS 10- YEAR OLD GIRL FOR SEEKING AN ORDER TO ENTER SABARIMALA TEMPLE. THE SAME IS DISMISSED IN LIGHT OF REVIEW PENDING ON THE SAID ISSUE BEFORE THE LARGER BENCH OF THE APEX COURT. BRIEF FACTS 10 year old girl filed a writ petition before the Kerala HIgh Court seeking relief of mandamus seeking directions to Travancore Devaswom Board to allow her to offer pilgrimage to Sabarimala Temple without taking into account the restrictions of age since she has not attained puberty or in the alternative to allow the request of the minor on sympathetic grounds. It is contended by the Petitioner that they are planning to visit the temple since long and it has been delayed due to onset of Covid earlier. Now, the family is under distress and also the father of Petitioner is not in good health. Hence, they have applied the same online but since in the meanwhile the age of Petit...
Post a Comment
Read more