TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (8) TMI 1022
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....A ORDER (ORAL) 1. The petitioner stands summoned as an accused before the court of Metropolitan Magistrate in terms of order dated 18.04.2015 passed on the criminal complaint dated 15.04.2015 of the respondent (the complainant) alleging offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 in relation to a cheque No.347241 dated 20.02.2015 for Rs. 30,000/- drawn against his acc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... attorney, present before the court) are advocates practicing in the Courts and Tribunals in Delhi. It appears that the petitioner had engaged the said sons of the complainant for representing him in some litigation before Central Administrative Tribunal (Principal Bench) at New Delhi and, in that context, professional fees of Rs. 50,000/- was settled to be paid by him to the said sons (his advoca....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ction 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 gives rise to a presumption, "unless contrary is proved" that the holder of the cheque had received the cheque of the nature mentioned in Section 138 "for the discharge, in whole or in part, of any debt or other liability". It has to be borne in mind that in order to maintain and bring home a case for offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Ins....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed. The complainant had no arrangement with the petitioner. She had not rendered any service to him. It is her sons who were engaged by him and the payment was due on account of professional services rendered by them to the petitioner. The judgment of the Supreme Court dated 19.03.2015 rendered in "HMT Watches Ltd. vs. M.A. Abida & Anr., Criminal Appeal No.471/2015, is distinguishable since the pr....