Bombay High Court Dismisses Accused's Revision Against Process Issued Under Section 138 NI Act — Cheque Dishonour Case Based on Loan Transaction. The court upheld the Magistrate's order issuing process as the complaint disclosed a prima facie case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY In Favour of Prosecution
  • 5
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The applicant, Nitesh Jayantilal Jain, was the original accused in a complaint filed by respondent No.2, Hasmukh Kanji Gala, under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The complainant alleged that he advanced a loan of Rs. 1,00,000/- to the accused, who issued a post-dated cheque dated 21.4.2005 drawn on Dena Bank, Worli Branch, Mumbai. The cheque was presented for encashment but was returned unpaid with the endorsement 'funds insufficient' on 27.5.2005 and 28.5.2005. A legal notice dated 25.6.2005 was sent to the accused, who replied through his advocate on 8.7.2005 but failed to make payment. Consequently, the complaint was filed and the Metropolitan Magistrate, 7th Court at Dadar, directed issuance of process against the accused. The accused challenged this order in Revision Application No.299 of 2007, arguing that the process was improperly issued. The High Court, after hearing the parties, dismissed the revision application, upholding the Magistrate's order. The court found that the complaint disclosed a prima facie case under Section 138 of the NI Act, and the process was validly issued. The judgment was delivered by Justice J.H. Bhatia on 5th July 2010.

Headnote

A) Negotiable Instruments Act - Dishonour of Cheque - Section 138 - Process Issuance - The accused challenged the issuance of process in a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, alleging that the cheque was issued for a loan of Rs. 1,00,000/- and was dishonoured due to insufficient funds. The court held that the process was validly issued and dismissed the revision application. (Paras 1-3)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the process issued under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 against the accused was valid and whether the revision application challenging the same should be allowed.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The High Court dismissed the criminal application, upholding the order of the Metropolitan Magistrate issuing process against the accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

Law Points

  • Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act
  • 1881
  • Dishonour of Cheque
  • Insufficient Funds
  • Presumption of Debt
  • Loan Transaction
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2010 LawText (BOM) (07) 79

Criminal Application No.4514 of 2009

2010-07-05

J. H. Bhatia

Mr. Sandeep C. Kekane, i/b M.K. Kocharekar for the applicants; Ms. A.A. Mane, APP for the respondent No.1 State.

Mr. Nitesh Jayantilal Jain

1. The State of Maharashtra, 2. Mr. Hasmukh Kanji Gala

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal revision application against order issuing process under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

Remedy Sought

The applicant (accused) sought to quash the order of the Metropolitan Magistrate issuing process against him.

Filing Reason

The accused challenged the issuance of process on the ground that it was improper.

Previous Decisions

The Metropolitan Magistrate, 7th Court at Dadar, directed issuance of process against the accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

Issues

Whether the process issued under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 was valid.

Submissions/Arguments

The accused argued that the process was improperly issued. The complainant contended that the process was validly issued based on the complaint.

Ratio Decidendi

The complaint disclosed a prima facie case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, and therefore the process was validly issued.

Judgment Excerpts

Heard learned counsel for the parties. The applicant before this Court is the original accused while respondent No.2 is the original complainant. On the basis of that complaint, learned Metropolitan Magistrate, directed to issue process against the accused u/s 138 Negotiable Instrument Act.

Procedural History

The complainant filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 in the Metropolitan Magistrate, 7th Court at Dadar, registered as Criminal Case No.5342/SS/2005. The Magistrate issued process against the accused. The accused challenged this order in Revision Application No.299 of 2007, which was dismissed. The present criminal application was filed against the order issuing process.

Acts & Sections

  • Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881: 138
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Accused's Revision Against Process Issued Under Section 138 NI Act — Cheque Dishonour Case Based on Loan Transaction. The court upheld the Magistrate's order issuing process as the complaint disclosed a prima facie case ...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Petitioner to Correct Cheque Number in Complaint Under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Typographical Error in Cheque Number Can Be Amended to Ensure Fair Trial and Avoid Prejudice to Respondent.