This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
Sec.138 of N.I.Act – Prosecution to be launched in Jurisdiction of court where cheque was dishonored- SC
Case Law Details
- Case Name
- Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod Vs State of Maharashtra & Anr. (Supreme Court of India)
- Appeal Number
- Only available for paid members
- Date of Judgement/Order
- Only available for paid members
- Courts
- Supreme Court of India
Upgrade to Basic or Premium to download.
Already Upgraded? Log in.
Advertisement
Honourable Supreme Court has held in the case of Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. that all the pending cases of cheque bouncing under Negotiable Instrument Act to be transferred to the place from the cheque is issued. The Court in the case has held as under-
31. To Sum up
(i) An offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is committed no sooner a cheque drawn by the accused on an account being maintained by him in a bank for discharge of debt/liability is returned unpaid for insufficiency of funds or for the reason that t...
Author Info
order of Stay about case of Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr.
This judgment should be reviewed. As the same is totally in favour of the Accused as they have already committed the offence by cheating the Complainant and as such the Complainant is at loss and suffering, they have to suffer more by giving the fees to the lawyers once again after filing the case at different state or court. This case simply favor the Accused who can steal the hard earned money of innocent creditors and enjoy it at there place because most of the small creditors will not go for litigation at it will again a total waste of time and money.
IN INDIA EVERY THING IS SO CONFUSE AND JUSTICE SYSTEM IS TOTALLY CORRUPT
JUDGES GOT THE GOOD SALARY WITH LUXURY CARS AND LOT OF HOLIDAYS AND THE ALLOWANCES OF HIGH COURT JUDGES ARE ALSO TAX FREE EVEN IN SOME CASES JUDGEMENTS ARE SO CONFUSED THAT CREATE MORE LITIGATION
LET ORDINARY MEN SUFFER IS THE BASIC PRINCIPLE OF INDIAN JUDICIARY SYSTEM AND INDIAN BUREAUCRACY
INDIA WILL DIE IT OWN DEATH NO NEED FOR ISIS TO INTERFERE POPULATION AND CORRUPTION WILL BE REAL CAUSE OF ITS DEATH
MORE SUFFERINGS FOR POOR AND COMMON MAN IS WAITING
The judgement is not favourable to Business community. It is a punishment to complainants and blessing for defaulters. (Looks like law supports defaulters). It is highly painful that even cases of 138 under NI act are dragged for years. Honourable Court must reconsider this judgement.Let us hope there will be interference from government to put the things right.
with high respects for Hon.Supreme court,It seems that judgement has been issued without considering ground reality. The judgement is not favourable to Business community.It is a punishment to complainants and blessing for defaulters.It is highly painful that even cases of 138 under NI act are dragged for years. This will lead to deficit of trust amongst business community and there will be instances that even post dated cheques by reputed companies will not serve purpose for getting material on credit terms.In fact, Laws should discourage and tend to punish defaulters but in instant case it is vice versa. Let us hope there will be interference from government to put the things right otherwise there will be chaos everywhere.
Agreed with the suggestions provided by Advocate Sargun Babuta and CA Sandeep Kanoi. Its a clear case of injustice on the part of the aggrieved person.He is already suffering from the loss due to non payment ,interests ,mental trauma for others dues to paid out of money to be recovered.Further he has no clue where to find a better lawyer,cost of litigation,and most importantly when and what will be outcome.Its simply a hardship and immediate action is required to remove such decision.This case simply favor the law breaker who can steal the hard earned money of innocent creditors and enjoy it at there place because most of the small creditors will not go for litigation at it will again a total waste of time and money.
This decision is acceptable only at one circumstance where a dead line is enforced,fast track court make such decisions and total compensation including penalty is paid.But, alas!! the system of judiciary is over burdened and we could not expect such thing to happen in near future unless our pending decisions are resolved and chances of early decision occurred.
Agreed with the suggestions provided by Advocate Sargun Babuta and CA Sandeep Kanoi. Its a clear case of injustice on the part of the aggrieved person.He is already suffering from the loss due to non payment ,interests ,mental trauma for others dues to paid out of money to be recovered.Further he has no clue where to find a better lawyer,cost of litigation,and most importantly when and what will be outcome.Its simply a hardship and immediate action is required to remove such decision.This case simply favor the law breaker who can steal the hard earned money of innocent creditors and enjoy it at there place because most of the small creditors will not go for litigation at it will again a total waste of time and money.
This decision is acceptable only at one circumstance where a dead line is enforced,fast track court make such decisions and total compensation including penalty is paid.But, alas!! the system of judiciary is over burdened and we could not expect such thing to happen in near future unless our pending decisions are resolved and chances of early decision occurred.