<?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>Criminal revision dismissed for cheque dishonour under Section 138 - conviction and fine upheld</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=90004</link>
    <description>The HC dismissed a criminal revision petition challenging conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for cheque dishonour. The petitioner issued a cheque for Rs. 6,00,000/- which was dishonoured twice due to insufficient funds. The Metropolitan Magistrate convicted the petitioner and imposed a fine of Rs. 10,65,000/-. The HC upheld the conviction, finding the loan and non-repayment established on balance of probabilities. Regarding jurisdictional challenge, the HC held that under the special provisions of Section 138, the Metropolitan Magistrate possessed authority to impose fine up to twice the cheque amount, making the imposed fine legally valid despite exceeding general Cr.P.C. limits under Section 29.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 02 Jul 2025 08:42:29 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Jul 2025 08:42:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=833132" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Criminal revision dismissed for cheque dishonour under Section 138 - conviction and fine upheld</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=90004</link>
      <description>The HC dismissed a criminal revision petition challenging conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for cheque dishonour. The petitioner issued a cheque for Rs. 6,00,000/- which was dishonoured twice due to insufficient funds. The Metropolitan Magistrate convicted the petitioner and imposed a fine of Rs. 10,65,000/-. The HC upheld the conviction, finding the loan and non-repayment established on balance of probabilities. Regarding jurisdictional challenge, the HC held that under the special provisions of Section 138, the Metropolitan Magistrate possessed authority to impose fine up to twice the cheque amount, making the imposed fine legally valid despite exceeding general Cr.P.C. limits under Section 29.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Jul 2025 08:42:29 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=90004</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>