https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298674 The court held that prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for a time-barred debt was unsustainable as the debt was not legally enforceable when the cheque was issued. The court emphasized that a cheque cannot be considered a written promise under Section 25(3) of the Indian Contract Act to revive a time-barred debt. The accused successfully raised the plea of limitation at the revision stage, leading to the court setting aside the lower courts' judgments and acquitting the accused of the charge under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. en-us Thu, 12 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 14 Nov 2021 18:45:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298674 The court held that prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for a time-barred debt was unsustainable as the debt was not legally enforceable when the cheque was issued. The court emphasized that a cheque cannot be considered a written promise under Section 25(3) of the Indian Contract Act to revive a time-barred debt. The accused successfully raised the plea of limitation at the revision stage, leading to the court setting aside the lower courts' judgments and acquitting the accused of the charge under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 12 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298674