Supreme Court of India Judgements

46670 Judgements hosted as on 9/12/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Cheque Dishonour

Cheque Dishonour

“The oral and the documentary evidence adduced by the complainant are sufficient to prove that it was a legally enforceable debt and that the cheques were issued to discharge the legally enforceable debt. With the evidence adduced by the complainant, the courts below ought to have raised the presumption under Section 139 of the Act

Aug 21, 2019 sclaw

The Supreme Court on Wednesday made pertinent observations regarding the burden of proof that falls upon opposing parties in a cheque bouncing dispute under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. A Bench…

Cheque Dishonour

Section 143A of Negotiable Instruments Act on Interim Compensation is not retrospective, SC -In our view, the applicability of Section 143A of the Act must, therefore, be held to be prospective in nature and confined to cases where offences were committe

Aug 1, 2019 sclaw

Section 143A of Negotiable Instruments Act on Interim Compensation is not retrospective, SC [Read Judgment] Murali Krishnan July 31 2019 FacebookTwitterWhatsAppShare282 The Supreme Court yesterday ruled that the Section 143A of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881,which provides for…

Cheque Dishonour

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI) – Sections 138, 143A and 148 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – Sections 357(2) and 389 – Dishonour of cheque – Suspension of Sentence – Direction to deposit 25% of the amount of compensation – Appeal against same – Section 148 of the N.I. Act as amended, shall be applicable in respect of the appeals against the order of conviction and sentence for the offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, even in a case where the criminal complaints for the offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act were filed prior to amendment Act No. 20/2018 i.e., prior to 01.09.2018.

May 31, 2019 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH  SURINDER SINGH DESWAL @ COL. S.S.DESWAL AND OTHERS — Appellant  Vs.  VIRENDER GANDHI — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and A.S. Bopanna, JJ.…

Cheque Dishonour

Dishonour of Cheque—Friendly Loan—When financial capacity of complainant to lend the amount is being questioned, it was necessary for the complainant to have explained his financial capacity—Complainant failed to prove his financial capacity to lend--A ccused acquitted.

Dishonour of Cheque—Rebuttable Presumption–Onus is on the accused to raise the probable defence—The standard of proof for rebutting the presumption is that of preponderance of probabilities.

Dishonour of Cheque—Rebuttable Presumption—Inference of preponderance of probabilities can be drawn not only from the materials brought on record by the parties but also by reference to the circumstances upon which they rely

May 25, 2019 sclaw

2019(2) Law Herald (SC) 1113 : 2019 LawHerald.Org 826 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before HonTjle Mr. Justice Ashok Bhushan Hon’ble Mr. Justice K.M. Joseph Criminal Appeal No. 636…

Cheque Dishonour

Dishonour of Cheque—Friendly Loan—Failure of complainant to prove the source of funds for advancing loan to accused cannot be a ground rebutting the presumption u/s 139 N.I. and because of that burden of proof on accused to prove probable defence does not get shifted on complainant. Dishonour of Cheque—Rebuttable Presumption—By mere denial or mere creation of doubt the presumption u/s 139 N.I. act cannot be held to have been rebutted by the accused

May 5, 2019 sclaw

2019(2) Law Herald (SC) 1029 : 2019 LawHerald.Org 784 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before Hon’ble Mr. Justice Abhay Manohar Sapre Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dinesh Maheshwari Criminal Appeal No.…

Cheque Dishonour

SCOI::: Issue involved in this matter is whether Section 143-A introduced by the Amendment Act No.20 of 2018 in the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 has retrospective application or not? As an interim measure, we direct the petitioner to deposit the sum, namely 15% of the cheque amount,

Apr 21, 2019 sclaw

ITEM NO.29                COURT NO.8                SECTION II-C SUPREME     COURT     OF     INDIA RECORD OF  PROCEEDINGS Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.3342/2019 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated…

Cheque Dishonour

Dishonour of Cheque—Offence by Company—Quashing—Role of a Director in a company is ultimately a question of fact—High Court must exercise its power under S. 482, Cr.P.C. when it is convinced, from the material on record, that allowing the proceedings to continue would be an abuse of process of the Court

Apr 21, 2019 sclaw

2019(2) Law Herald (SC) 939 : 2019 LawHerald.Org 731 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.V. Ramana Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mohan M. Shantanagoudar Hon’ble Ms. Justice…

You missed

Constitution Service

Classification of Military casualties and the eligibility for Liberalised Family Pension — Battle Casualty —Illness Caused by Extreme Climatic Conditions as Battle Casualty — The Court establishes that a soldier’s death due to illness resulting from extreme climatic conditions while on duty near a sensitive border area (such as the Line of Control) can be categorized as a ‘Battle Casualty’ — This expands the interpretation of what constitutes a battle casualty under military regulations. – Liberalised Family Pension (LFP) — Application of Category E (f) — The judgment clarifies that deaths occurring in war-like situations, including those near international borders or lines of control due to environmental stresses, fall under clause (f) of category E of the relevant military order — This broadens the scope of eligibility for LFP under such circumstances.

Dec 8, 2024 sclaw
Constitution

Temple Bye Laws — Oachira Parabrahma Temple — Ancient structure without a building or deity, governed by Bye-laws with three-tier elected committees — Appellants, elected Secretary and President, challenged two High Court orders (2020 and 2023) that removed their committee and appointed an unelected one under an Administrative Head, citing violations of the temple’s Bye-laws and customs —Legality of appointing an unelected committee and removing the elected one contrary to the temple’s Bye-laws — Petitioner argues that the High Court overstepped its jurisdiction and violated the temple’s governance structure by appointing an unelected committee and removing the elected one without proper legal basis — The High Court’s actions were necessary for the efficient administration of the temple until a scheme could be framed and new elections held — The Supreme Court modified the High Court orders, appointing a new retired Judge as Administrative Head to conduct fair elections within four months, while directing all parties to cooperate — The Court emphasized the need to preserve temple properties and governance as per established customs and laws — The Supreme Court struck down the High Court’s order appointing an unelected committee, appointed a new Administrative Head to conduct elections, and directed all parties to cooperate, emphasizing the importance of adhering to the temple’s established governance structure and Bye-laws.

Dec 8, 2024 sclaw
Acquittal

Evidence Act, 1872 — Section 27 — Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 384, 364, 302 and 201 — Murder — Circumstantial Evidence — The Supreme Court acquitted the appellant of murder charges as the prosecution failed to prove the crucial link of the accused’s disclosure leading to the discovery of skeletal remains under Section 27 and the DNA evidence was also found to be inconclusive due to lack of proper collection of samples. – Proof of Disclosure Statements under Section 27 — Voluntariness and Uninfluenced Nature — The Court reiterates that the information provided by an accused under Section 27 must be voluntary and uninfluenced by threat, duress, or coercion.

Dec 8, 2024 sclaw
Acquittal

Arms Act, 1959 — Sections 25, 54 and 59 — Buttondar knife — Specific Intent Required — The court clarifies that mere possession of a knife covered by a notification like the DAD Notification is not sufficient to constitute an offense under the Arms Act — There must be specific intent to use it for the prohibited purposes such as “manufacture, sale, or possession for sale or test.” – The prosecution must clearly allege and prove the intent of the accused to use the weapon for the specified prohibited purposes — Absence of such allegation in the charge-sheet renders the proceedings defective.

Dec 8, 2024 sclaw