<?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>2025 (10) TMI 725 - UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779929</link>
    <description>Prior stop-payment instructions, coupled with a cheque already reported lost and rendered incapable of encashment, may prevent the essential ingredients of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act from being made out; in that situation, dishonour on a later presentation does not sustain prosecution and the statutory presumption under Section 139 cannot override the factual basis showing the cheque was disabled. A complaint is also premature if filed before expiry of the statutory period after demand notice, particularly where actual service of notice is not proved by acknowledgment or equivalent material. On those facts, cognizance cannot be sustained and continuation of proceedings is legally unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Oct 2025 08:30:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=858813" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (10) TMI 725 - UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779929</link>
      <description>Prior stop-payment instructions, coupled with a cheque already reported lost and rendered incapable of encashment, may prevent the essential ingredients of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act from being made out; in that situation, dishonour on a later presentation does not sustain prosecution and the statutory presumption under Section 139 cannot override the factual basis showing the cheque was disabled. A complaint is also premature if filed before expiry of the statutory period after demand notice, particularly where actual service of notice is not proved by acknowledgment or equivalent material. On those facts, cognizance cannot be sustained and continuation of proceedings is legally unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779929</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>