https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383310 In a cheque dishonour prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the High Court held that the limitation objection could not be accepted at the threshold because the relevant dates and the asserted email reply raised matters requiring evidence. It further held that objections based on the cheque being old or blank, the absence of documentary proof of the loan, and the complainant's source of funds involved disputed questions of fact suitable for trial, and could not justify quashing in inherent jurisdiction. The application under Section 482 CrPC was rejected and the order issuing process was left undisturbed. en-us Fri, 19 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 22 Jul 2019 06:19:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383310 In a cheque dishonour prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the High Court held that the limitation objection could not be accepted at the threshold because the relevant dates and the asserted email reply raised matters requiring evidence. It further held that objections based on the cheque being old or blank, the absence of documentary proof of the loan, and the complainant's source of funds involved disputed questions of fact suitable for trial, and could not justify quashing in inherent jurisdiction. The application under Section 482 CrPC was rejected and the order issuing process was left undisturbed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 19 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383310