https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=407894 At the stage of process in a cheque dishonour complaint, an express averment that the cheque was issued in discharge of a legally enforceable debt or liability is not indispensable where the foundational facts attract the statutory presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881; the accused may rebut that presumption at trial, so the complaint was not quashed on this ground. Omission to file the list of prosecution witnesses with the complaint was treated as a curable procedural irregularity, not a jurisdictional defect, and it did not vitiate issuance of process absent pleaded prejudice or failure of justice. The challenge to process therefore failed. en-us Mon, 17 May 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 25 May 2021 08:39:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=407894 At the stage of process in a cheque dishonour complaint, an express averment that the cheque was issued in discharge of a legally enforceable debt or liability is not indispensable where the foundational facts attract the statutory presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881; the accused may rebut that presumption at trial, so the complaint was not quashed on this ground. Omission to file the list of prosecution witnesses with the complaint was treated as a curable procedural irregularity, not a jurisdictional defect, and it did not vitiate issuance of process absent pleaded prejudice or failure of justice. The challenge to process therefore failed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 17 May 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=407894