<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>High Court Quashes Conviction in Cheque Bounce Case, Finds Appeal Procedurally Flawed and Evidence Insufficient</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=89313</link>
    <description>HC reverses the Sessions Court&#039;s conviction, finding the appeal against acquittal non-maintainable and procedurally improper. The court determined that the complainant failed to discharge the burden of proving the accused&#039;s liability under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The accused successfully rebutted the presumption of debt through documentary evidence (Ex.D-1 to Ex.D-8). Exercising revisional jurisdiction under Section 401 Cr.P.C., the HC set aside the conviction, holding that the complainant did not approach the court with clean hands and the Sessions Court acted without jurisdiction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 12 Jun 2025 07:21:34 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 Jun 2025 07:21:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=828548" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>High Court Quashes Conviction in Cheque Bounce Case, Finds Appeal Procedurally Flawed and Evidence Insufficient</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=89313</link>
      <description>HC reverses the Sessions Court&#039;s conviction, finding the appeal against acquittal non-maintainable and procedurally improper. The court determined that the complainant failed to discharge the burden of proving the accused&#039;s liability under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The accused successfully rebutted the presumption of debt through documentary evidence (Ex.D-1 to Ex.D-8). Exercising revisional jurisdiction under Section 401 Cr.P.C., the HC set aside the conviction, holding that the complainant did not approach the court with clean hands and the Sessions Court acted without jurisdiction.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Jun 2025 07:21:34 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=89313</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>