Negotiable Instrument Act covers not only debt but also covers Later Liability

Madan Tiwari Vs State of Chhattisgarh (Chhattisgarh High Court)

Purport of the special law under the Negotiable Instruments Act is to ensure that the promise to pay is abided by the person so promising. The provision under Section 139 of the NI Act is that it shall be presumed that the holder of a cheque received the cheque of the nature referred to in Section 138 of NI Act for the discharge, in whole or in part, of any debt or other liability.

In light of above, the signing of cheque by the applicant indicate that he admitted his liability, and he has not rebutted the presumption of 139 Negotiable Instruments Act, therefore not only debt but the liability also call for criminal proceedings under this act. With reference to the facts of the present case, the Court noted that the trial court as well as the Appellate Court having found that cheque contained the signatures of the accused/applicant and it was presented in the Bank of the presumption under Section 139 was rightly raised which was not rebutted by the accused. Both the courts below have convicted the applicant under Section 138 of NI Act. The Trial Court and the Appellate Court arrived at the specific concurrent factual finding that the cheque had admittedly been signed by the applicant-accused. Thus, I find no merit in this revision and the same is hereby dismissed and it is dismissed as such.

FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER / JUDGMENT

Being aggrieved by the judgment dated 22.01.2010, passed by the 12^th Additional Sessions Judge (FTC) Durg in Cr.A. No. 80/2007 whereby the judgment dated 29.05.2007 passed in Cr. Case No. 780/2007 has been affirmed by convicting the applicant under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act and sentencing him to undergo RI for two years and fine of Rs. 5,000/- with default stipulation.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.