https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415380 In a cheque dishonour prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the High Court should not quash the complaint in inherent jurisdiction where the complaint discloses the ingredients of the offence and the accused relies on disputed factual defences. Allegations that the cheque was obtained by coercion and that later letters or receipts showed no subsisting liability could not be ined at the quashing stage, because those matters required evidence at trial. The statutory presumption that a cheque was issued towards a legal liability also weighed against premature interference. The petition for quashing was therefore rejected and the proceedings were allowed to continue. en-us Wed, 01 Dec 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 04 Dec 2021 08:43:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415380 In a cheque dishonour prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the High Court should not quash the complaint in inherent jurisdiction where the complaint discloses the ingredients of the offence and the accused relies on disputed factual defences. Allegations that the cheque was obtained by coercion and that later letters or receipts showed no subsisting liability could not be ined at the quashing stage, because those matters required evidence at trial. The statutory presumption that a cheque was issued towards a legal liability also weighed against premature interference. The petition for quashing was therefore rejected and the proceedings were allowed to continue. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 01 Dec 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415380