https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295821 A complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is not ordinarily quashed merely because the drawer claims the debt was time barred, the cheque was blank or incomplete, or the cheque was stolen and misused. The statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 support the holder once the complaint alleges issuance and dishonour of the cheque, while Section 20 permits completion of an inchoate instrument by an authorised holder. Questions about legally enforceable liability, authority to fill particulars, and alleged misuse are factual defences for trial, not matters for threshold quashing under Section 482 CrPC. en-us Fri, 02 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 21 Jun 2021 13:16:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295821 A complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is not ordinarily quashed merely because the drawer claims the debt was time barred, the cheque was blank or incomplete, or the cheque was stolen and misused. The statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 support the holder once the complaint alleges issuance and dishonour of the cheque, while Section 20 permits completion of an inchoate instrument by an authorised holder. Questions about legally enforceable liability, authority to fill particulars, and alleged misuse are factual defences for trial, not matters for threshold quashing under Section 482 CrPC. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 02 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295821