https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303271 The Court dismissed the petitions and discharged the Rule, upholding the complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. It found a prima facie case existed regarding the allegations of neglecting payment leading to a bounced cheque. Despite the petitioner's arguments of fraud, the Court emphasized the burden of proof under Section 139 of the Act and the necessity to establish fraud as a question of fact before legal consequences can follow. The judgment also highlighted the application of legal precedents related to fraud in judicial proceedings and the criteria for quashing a complaint based on established principles. en-us Tue, 15 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 Jul 2022 12:31:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303271 The Court dismissed the petitions and discharged the Rule, upholding the complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. It found a prima facie case existed regarding the allegations of neglecting payment leading to a bounced cheque. Despite the petitioner's arguments of fraud, the Court emphasized the burden of proof under Section 139 of the Act and the necessity to establish fraud as a question of fact before legal consequences can follow. The judgment also highlighted the application of legal precedents related to fraud in judicial proceedings and the criteria for quashing a complaint based on established principles. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 15 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303271