https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466583 A cheque drawn on an account of a bank that had merged and was therefore invalid on the date of presentation did not satisfy proviso (a) to Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The court treated the dishonour as one of an invalid cheque rather than a cheque attracting penal liability, and held that the ingredients of Section 138 were not made out. Exercising inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, it quashed the criminal proceedings as an abuse of process where the complaint could not be sustained in law. en-us Fri, 25 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 13 Feb 2026 09:18:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466583 A cheque drawn on an account of a bank that had merged and was therefore invalid on the date of presentation did not satisfy proviso (a) to Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The court treated the dishonour as one of an invalid cheque rather than a cheque attracting penal liability, and held that the ingredients of Section 138 were not made out. Exercising inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, it quashed the criminal proceedings as an abuse of process where the complaint could not be sustained in law. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 25 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466583