https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295584 Concurrent findings sustaining a conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act will not be disturbed in revision where the cheque signature, supporting agreement, and legally enforceable liability are admitted, and an unsubstantiated plea of threat or coercion fails on the evidence; the conviction was therefore upheld. In sentencing, the court emphasised that punishment in cheque dishonour cases should balance deterrence with fairness, and that compensation under Section 357(3) CrPC should ordinarily be considered to redress the loss. The substantive imprisonment was reduced and compensation was ordered with a default sentence. en-us Fri, 25 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 10 Jun 2021 09:50:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295584 Concurrent findings sustaining a conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act will not be disturbed in revision where the cheque signature, supporting agreement, and legally enforceable liability are admitted, and an unsubstantiated plea of threat or coercion fails on the evidence; the conviction was therefore upheld. In sentencing, the court emphasised that punishment in cheque dishonour cases should balance deterrence with fairness, and that compensation under Section 357(3) CrPC should ordinarily be considered to redress the loss. The substantive imprisonment was reduced and compensation was ordered with a default sentence. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 25 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295584