<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2018 (8) TMI 737 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365265</link>
    <description>Criminal proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act were held not fit for quashing under Section 482 CrPC where the complaint prima facie contained the essential ingredients of the offence, including cheque issuance, presentation, dishonour, notice, and non-payment within time. The statutory presumption under Section 139 operated in favour of the holder, and the accused&#039;s plea that the cheque book was missing and the cheque was misused was treated as a defence for trial, not a ground for threshold interference. The complaint was allowed to proceed, leaving the accused to establish his defence before the Trial Court.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 01 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Aug 2018 10:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=530667" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (8) TMI 737 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365265</link>
      <description>Criminal proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act were held not fit for quashing under Section 482 CrPC where the complaint prima facie contained the essential ingredients of the offence, including cheque issuance, presentation, dishonour, notice, and non-payment within time. The statutory presumption under Section 139 operated in favour of the holder, and the accused&#039;s plea that the cheque book was missing and the cheque was misused was treated as a defence for trial, not a ground for threshold interference. The complaint was allowed to proceed, leaving the accused to establish his defence before the Trial Court.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365265</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>