https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298732 The High Court upheld the conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, emphasizing the accused's failure to disprove the complainant's case and the lack of merit in challenging the lower Courts' findings. The judgment underscores the significance of meeting the burden of proof in cases concerning dishonored cheques and the restrictions of revisional jurisdiction in reassessing factual evidence. The accused was directed to serve the remaining sentence, and any deposited amount was to be given to the complainant or her legal heirs. Parties were allowed to seek compounding of the offense under Section 147 of the Act, even post the accused's custody, with a requirement to inform the Assistant Registrar of the outcome. en-us Tue, 18 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 18 Nov 2021 06:46:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298732 The High Court upheld the conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, emphasizing the accused's failure to disprove the complainant's case and the lack of merit in challenging the lower Courts' findings. The judgment underscores the significance of meeting the burden of proof in cases concerning dishonored cheques and the restrictions of revisional jurisdiction in reassessing factual evidence. The accused was directed to serve the remaining sentence, and any deposited amount was to be given to the complainant or her legal heirs. Parties were allowed to seek compounding of the offense under Section 147 of the Act, even post the accused's custody, with a requirement to inform the Assistant Registrar of the outcome. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 18 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298732