https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776136 The HC upheld the conviction under Section 138 of the NI Act, finding the accused guilty of cheque dishonor due to insufficient funds and rejecting challenges to the complainant's debt proof and burden shifting. The court declined to interfere with the conviction, citing no illegality or irregularity in the trial and appellate courts' findings. However, the HC modified the sentence, setting aside the substantive imprisonment and ordering the accused to undergo imprisonment only until the rising of the court, with a fine of Rs.4,00,000/- in each case. Failure to pay the fine will result in simple imprisonment for one month per case. The fine, if paid, is to be disbursed to the complainant under Section 357(1) Cr.P.C. The revision petition was allowed in part. en-us Thu, 10 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Aug 2025 08:19:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776136 The HC upheld the conviction under Section 138 of the NI Act, finding the accused guilty of cheque dishonor due to insufficient funds and rejecting challenges to the complainant's debt proof and burden shifting. The court declined to interfere with the conviction, citing no illegality or irregularity in the trial and appellate courts' findings. However, the HC modified the sentence, setting aside the substantive imprisonment and ordering the accused to undergo imprisonment only until the rising of the court, with a fine of Rs.4,00,000/- in each case. Failure to pay the fine will result in simple imprisonment for one month per case. The fine, if paid, is to be disbursed to the complainant under Section 357(1) Cr.P.C. The revision petition was allowed in part. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 10 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776136