Maruti Udyog Ltd. Vs. Narender & Others
EmailAppeal: Criminal Appeal No. 706-715 of 1998
(Arising out of SLPs (Crl.) Nos. 465, 466, 469, 467, 470, 471, 475, 477 and 486 of 1998)
(Arising out of SLPs (Crl.) Nos. 465, 466, 469, 467, 470, 471, 475, 477 and 486 of 1998)
Petitioner: Maruti Udyog Ltd.
Respondent: Narender & Others
Apeal: Criminal Appeal No. 706-715 of 1998
(Arising out of SLPs (Crl.) Nos. 465, 466, 469, 467, 470, 471, 475, 477 and 486 of 1998)
(Arising out of SLPs (Crl.) Nos. 465, 466, 469, 467, 470, 471, 475, 477 and 486 of 1998)
Judges: M.K. MUKHERJEE & S.S.M. QUADRI, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Jul 24, 1998
Head Note:
COMMERCIAL LAWS
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881
Sections 138 and 139 – Cheque – Dishonour of – Criminal Proceedings – Scope of. Held in view of the express provisions in Section 139 a presumption must be drawn that the holder received the cheque of the same nature referred to in Section 138 for discharge of any debt or other liability. Court not justified in questioning the complaints at the initial stage itself.
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881
Sections 138 and 139 – Cheque – Dishonour of – Criminal Proceedings – Scope of. Held in view of the express provisions in Section 139 a presumption must be drawn that the holder received the cheque of the same nature referred to in Section 138 for discharge of any debt or other liability. Court not justified in questioning the complaints at the initial stage itself.
JUDGEMENT:
ORDER
1. Leave granted in all the petitions.
2. In view of the express provision of Section 139 of the Negoti-able Instruments Act, 1881, a presumption must be drawn that the holder of the cheque received the cheque, of the nature referred to in Section 138, for the discharge of any debit or other li-ability unless the contrary is proved. Therefore, the High Court was not justified in entertaining and accepting the plea of the accused-respondent at the initial stage of the proceedings and quashing the complaints filed by the appellant. We, therefore, allow these appeals, set aside the impugned orders of the High Court and direct the trial court to proceed with the complaints in accordance with law.
1. Leave granted in all the petitions.
2. In view of the express provision of Section 139 of the Negoti-able Instruments Act, 1881, a presumption must be drawn that the holder of the cheque received the cheque, of the nature referred to in Section 138, for the discharge of any debit or other li-ability unless the contrary is proved. Therefore, the High Court was not justified in entertaining and accepting the plea of the accused-respondent at the initial stage of the proceedings and quashing the complaints filed by the appellant. We, therefore, allow these appeals, set aside the impugned orders of the High Court and direct the trial court to proceed with the complaints in accordance with law.
