Judicial Pronouncements under 138 NIA Act

Judicial Pronouncements under 138 NIA Act

  • Insufficient funds
  • Exceeds arrangements- funds are sufficient but, the amount mentioned in the cheque exceeds the arrangement made with the bank.
  • Payment stopped by drawer- Som Nath Versus State of Punjab and another 2008(1) RCR(Criminal) 273 (P&H).
  • Account already closed. Jitender Poddar Versus Prem Nath Sharma 1994(3) RCR(Criminal) 353(P&H), Jaspal Singh Bedi Versus State of Punjab 2005(1) RCR(Criminal) 78m (P&H).
  • No such account. Sandeep Mehra alias Babi Versus Chander Parkash Madan 2015 ACD 166 (P&H).
  • Stop payment. M/s Gupta Rice and General Mills Versus M/s. Meerut Agro Mills Ltd. And another 2011(3) Law Herald 2690.
  • Signature differ. Charanjit Singh Chawla Versus State of Punjab 2009(2) RCR (Criminal) 690 (P&H).
  • Refer to drawer. M/s Lily hire purchase pvt. Ltd vs Darshan Lal 1997(1)RCR Cr 580
  • Not arranged for. VK Bansal vs State of Haryana 2011(1) Law Herald 396
  • Account not in the name of accusedSection 138 not made out– A person must have drawn cheque on account maintained by him– Jugesh Sehgal Versus Shamsher Singh Gogi 2009(3) RCR(Criminal) 712 (SC).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to top
हिंदी में पढ़ें