https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=404000 In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the High Court found that the complaint disclosed a prima facie case where the cheque was alleged to have been issued against an existing liability, dishonoured for insufficient funds, followed by notice and non-payment. The accused's claim that the cheque had been lost or stolen was treated as a defence requiring proof at trial, particularly because the accused admitted the cheque signature and had not informed the bank or sought stop-payment. At the discharge stage, the Court held that a mini trial was impermissible and upheld the rejection of discharge and the revisional order. en-us Fri, 22 Jan 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 11 Feb 2021 20:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=404000 In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the High Court found that the complaint disclosed a prima facie case where the cheque was alleged to have been issued against an existing liability, dishonoured for insufficient funds, followed by notice and non-payment. The accused's claim that the cheque had been lost or stolen was treated as a defence requiring proof at trial, particularly because the accused admitted the cheque signature and had not informed the bank or sought stop-payment. At the discharge stage, the Court held that a mini trial was impermissible and upheld the rejection of discharge and the revisional order. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 22 Jan 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=404000