https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401132 In a cheque dishonour prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the High Court held that disputed defences could not justify quashing at the Section 482 stage. The petitioner admitted the loan transaction, issuance of the cheque, and its return unpaid for insufficiency of funds, while the pleas based on a partition deed and alleged misuse of blank cheques raised factual disputes requiring trial. At the quashing stage, the Court would not examine the defence or displace the statutory presumption in favour of the complainant. The petition for quashing was therefore not maintainable on the facts presented, and the criminal proceedings were left undisturbed. en-us Thu, 19 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 28 Nov 2020 09:36:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401132 In a cheque dishonour prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the High Court held that disputed defences could not justify quashing at the Section 482 stage. The petitioner admitted the loan transaction, issuance of the cheque, and its return unpaid for insufficiency of funds, while the pleas based on a partition deed and alleged misuse of blank cheques raised factual disputes requiring trial. At the quashing stage, the Court would not examine the defence or displace the statutory presumption in favour of the complainant. The petition for quashing was therefore not maintainable on the facts presented, and the criminal proceedings were left undisturbed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 19 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401132