https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415044 A cheque dishonour complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act could not be quashed in inherent jurisdiction where the dispute depended on rival factual versions about issuance, encashment, return and alleged theft of the cheque. The court reasoned that such issues require evidence and cannot be resolved at the quashment stage, especially when the complaint discloses a prima facie liability attracting the statutory presumption in favour of the cheque holder, which the drawer may rebut only at trial. The cognizance order also was not liable to be quashed merely because it was not detailed, since a detailed order is not a precondition for issuance of process. en-us Tue, 16 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 25 Nov 2021 07:56:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415044 A cheque dishonour complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act could not be quashed in inherent jurisdiction where the dispute depended on rival factual versions about issuance, encashment, return and alleged theft of the cheque. The court reasoned that such issues require evidence and cannot be resolved at the quashment stage, especially when the complaint discloses a prima facie liability attracting the statutory presumption in favour of the cheque holder, which the drawer may rebut only at trial. The cognizance order also was not liable to be quashed merely because it was not detailed, since a detailed order is not a precondition for issuance of process. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 16 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415044