September,18,2015: It was argued before Delhi High Court that despite the categorical admission of the complainant that the cheques were accepted by him for security purposes and that they were received by him in the year 2007 at the time of handing over of money to the petitioner, the petitioner has been convicted.
On the contrary it was submitte on behalf of Complainant that a cheque issued even by way of security would becovered under Section 138 of the NI Act. The onus to raise the probable defence lies only with the accused as the law casts a presumption infavour of the holder of the cheque that the dishonoured cheque wasissued in respect of the debt or other liability.
The Delhi High Court in this case titled Wilson Mathew v. State dated 15.9.2015 has held that Security cheques per se would not get out of the ambit of Section 138 of the NI Act.
Though the Court held that Security cheques per se would not get out of the ambit of Section 138 of the NI Act, but held that in the facts of the present case, viz. the circumstance in which the security cheque is said to have been issued by the accused and accepted by the complainant and the admission of the complainant about his having accepted Rs.8 lacs. from the accused and his denial of having paid Rs.10 lacs to the accused the case of the complainant appears to be highly doubtful, and thereby acquitted the Accused.
Read Ful Text of the Judgment-
16.9.2015 – Union Cabinet Today has approved to promulgate the Negotiable Instruments (Amendment) Ordinance,2015 READ MORE…