https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259406 High Court interference under Section 482 CrPC is not justified where a Section 138 NI Act complaint is resisted on disputed factual defences, such as cheque issuance as security, absence of subsisting liability, or alleged non-compliance with notice requirements, because those matters require evidence at trial. A cheque dishonoured on "stop payment" instructions can still attract Section 138 when it was otherwise issued towards a debt or liability, and the statutory ingredients remain applicable. The complaints were restored for trial, leaving the accused's factual defences open for determination on evidence. en-us Thu, 19 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Dec 2016 12:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259406 High Court interference under Section 482 CrPC is not justified where a Section 138 NI Act complaint is resisted on disputed factual defences, such as cheque issuance as security, absence of subsisting liability, or alleged non-compliance with notice requirements, because those matters require evidence at trial. A cheque dishonoured on "stop payment" instructions can still attract Section 138 when it was otherwise issued towards a debt or liability, and the statutory ingredients remain applicable. The complaints were restored for trial, leaving the accused's factual defences open for determination on evidence. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 19 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259406