Unlawful outward remittances via Hawala using proforma invoices and electronic records proved; documents admitted, directors penalised, penalties redu...
Attachment of equivalent-value properties as proceeds of crime upheld; preventive attachment order and confirmation sustained; no independent ED reinv...
Broker trading-system "technical glitch" redefinition and narrowed incident-reporting regime for large IBT/STWT brokers requiring 2-hr notice and 14-w...
Page of 4811
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
7041 to 7060 of 96208 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Where a cheque bears material alterations (amount/date), such change falls within Section 87 and will void the instrument as against a party who did not consent; if alterations were made by the drawer with intent to prevent payment, dishonour will attract liability under Section 138, but if made by the payee for undue benefit the criminal liability may not follow. Determination of who made the alteration is a question of fact for trial and cannot be decided at this stage; petitioner's challenge is therefore dismissed without prejudice to raising these factual/contention issues before the trial court. - HC
Where a cheque bears material alterations (amount/date), such change falls within Section 87 and will void the instrument as against a party who did not consent; if alterations were made by the drawer with intent to prevent payment, dishonour will attract liability under Section 138, but if made by the payee for undue benefit the criminal liability may not follow. Determination of who made the alteration is a question of fact for trial and cannot be decided at this stage; petitioner's challenge is therefore dismissed without prejudice to raising these factual/contention issues before the trial court. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.