January 8, 2026 5:44 am

Cheque Dishonour

Cheque Dishonour – Concurrent Sentencing Rule Only When Cases Arise Out Of Single Transaction

Bysclaw

Aug 2, 2023

This content is restricted to site members. If you are an existing user, please log in. New users may register below.

By sclaw

Related Post

Cheque Dishonour

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Inherent powers of High Court — Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 138 (Dishonour of cheque for insufficiency of funds) — Quashing of criminal proceedings — Scope of inquiry at pre-trial stage — When complaint discloses all necessary ingredients of Section 138 of N.I. Act, High Court should not conduct a roving inquiry into disputed questions of fact, such as whether the cheque was issued for the discharge of a legally enforceable debt or liability, especially in light of the statutory presumption under Section 139 of the N.I. Act — Quashing of complaint at the threshold by the High Court by appreciating evidence/materials is unwarranted where a prima facie case is made out.

Jan 4, 2026 sclaw

Cheque Dishonour

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 138, Section 142(2), Section 142A — Territorial Jurisdiction for cheque dishonour cases (post-2015 Amendment) — Account Payee Cheques — Jurisdiction for complaints under Section 138 concerning cheques ‘delivered for collection through an account’ (Account Payee Cheques) lies exclusively with the court having local jurisdiction over the branch of the bank where the payee maintains the account (payee’s home branch) — This position is anchored in Section 142(2)(a) read with its Explanation — The legal fiction in the Explanation deems a cheque delivered at any branch of the payee’s bank to have been delivered at the payee’s home branch for jurisdictional purposes, overriding the actual place of delivery. (Paras 39, 54, 58, 59, 76)

Nov 30, 2025 sclaw

Cheque Dishonour

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 138 — Dishonour of cheque — Quashing of proceedings — Cheques issued as security and not for consideration — Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) clearly stated cheques were for security purposes to show banks and not for deposit — Complainant failed to read the complete terms of MOU in isolation and misinterpreted it to claim cheques were converted into debt — Court empowered to consider unimpeachable documents at pre-trial stage to prevent injustice — Complaints under Section 138 NI Act liable to be quashed.

Nov 2, 2025 sclaw

Categories

Archives

You missed

Meritorious reserved category candidates must be considered against unreserved vacancies at the screening stage without availing any concession, prioritizing merit over category bias.

Jan 4, 2026 sclaw

The Commission under the WBCE Act has jurisdiction to adjudicate deficiencies in patient care services and qualifications of personnel, distinct from medical negligence handled by State Medical Councils.

Jan 4, 2026 sclaw

Direct Taxation Income Tax Act

Income Tax Act, 1961 — Section 37(1) — Revenue Expenditure vs. Capital Expenditure — Non-compete fee — Whether payment of non-compete fee constitutes allowable revenue expenditure or capital expenditure — Non-compete fee is paid to restrain a competitor, which protects or enhances the business profitability and facilitates carrying on the business more efficiently — Such payment neither creates a new asset nor increases the profit-earning apparatus for the payer, meaning the enduring advantage, if any, is not in the capital field — The length of time of the advantage is not determinative if the advantage merely facilitates business operations, leaving fixed assets untouched — Payment of non-compete fee made by the appellant (formed as a joint venture) to L&T (previous partner) to restrain L&T from competing for 7 years was essentially to keep a potential competitor out and ensure the appellant operated more efficiently and profitably, without creating a new capital asset or monopoly — Held: Payment of non-compete fee is an allowable revenue expenditure under Section 37(1) of the Act. (Paras 16, 25-29)

Jan 4, 2026 sclaw

Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 118 — Competency of child witness — Effect of delay and tutoring — Although a minor child is competent to testify, the reliability and evidentiary value of testimony given many years after the event, especially when the child has been residing with the complainant’s family (maternal grandparents), is significantly affected by the high possibility of memory distortion and tutoring. (Paras 5, 7, 10.2)

Jan 4, 2026 sclaw