TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 1113X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d to probablise the suggestive case that the complainant is lend no financial capactancy and he is man of no means, as claimed by him. Either by direct evidence and to eliciate any circumstance to that effect by preponderance of probability. Revision Petitioner has miserably failed to probablize the suggestive case and except this point,no other point urged were and both the courts below have a concurrently held that the complainant is entitled for the presumption under the Negotiable Instrument Act and the respondent/accused has failed to probablize the suggestive case is well merited and well considered and the same does not warrant any interference by this Court and this Criminal Revision Petition is devoid of merits and accordingly, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nows very well the accused herein. The accused met him in person on 30.07.2008 and asked a loan of ₹ 4,65,000/- without any interest, for his urgent needs and promised him that he will repay the amount within a month's time. The accused had issued a cheque on the same day for ₹ 4,65,000/- bearing no.904025, dated 21.08.2008 drawn on state Bank of Hyederabad, P.N.Pudur Branch, Coimbatore. As per the request of the accused, the cheque Ex.P1 was presented into the complainant's banker on 22.08.2008, but the same was unpaid and returned on 25.08.2008 through the accused banker, due to the reason of Funds insufficient . The original return memo issued by the accused banker on 25.08.2008 is marked as Ex.P2. A lawyer's not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed counsel for the Revision Petitioner has submitted that the respondent does not have any solvency for making payment of ₹ 4,65,000/- and both the Courts below failed to see that the respondent have given the said amount as a loan when he is not in income tax assess and he has no income and relied upon the decision reported in 2008 (1) CTC page 433 has held that: Ingredients of offence and nature of presumption arising under Section 139 and Section 138 has three ingredients viz., (a) that there is legally enforceable debt (b) that cheque was drawn for discharge in whole or in part of any debt or other liability which presupposes legally enforceable debt, and (c) that cheque so issued had been returned due to insufficiency of fu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oss examination of P.W.1, though, an attempt has been made by the Revision petitioner/accused to touch upon the financial capacity of the P.W.1. However, such an attempt as become fertile in view of the positive evidence by the P.W.1 in the cross examination that from the saving of his earning he has made the amount. Both the courts below have concurrently and rightly held that the complainant has proved the necessary ingredients to raise the presumption in his favour and however, the respondent/accused has fasted to probablise the suggestive case that the complainant is lend no financial capactancy and he is man of no means, as claimed by him. Either by direct evidence and to eliciate any circumstance to that effect by preponderance of pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
