Home | Legal Advice | Cheque Bounce Cases | Blank cheque would attract presumption under section 139 NI Act

Blank cheque would attract presumption under section 139 NI Act

Shivendra Pratap Singh

Advocate

10/02/2021

Reading Time:

Even a blank cheque would attract presumption under section 139 of the Negotiable Instrument Act. Section 139 of NI Act, raises presumption in favor of holder of cheque that it was issued in discharge of debt or other liability. The accused cannot rebut this presumption merely on the ground that he has given a blank cheque for the purpose other than discharge of debt.

The holder of cheque can file a complaint under section 138 NI Act if drawer dishonours the cheque. When holder of cheque produces duly signed cheque the law presumes that accused issued the cheque in discharge of debt or other liability. The drawer of cheque cannot take plea that it was blank a cheque and not given to complainant in discharge of debt.

In Rohitbhai Jivanlal Patel v. State of Gujarat (2019) 18 SCC 106 the Supreme Court has held that accused can rebut the presumption by bringing on record such facts and circumstances as to show the preponderance of probabilities towards absence of debt and other financial liability.

Court cannot demand evidence from the complainant

When the accused takes plea that dishonoured cheque was a blank cheque the court cannot demand evidence from the complainant to prove that cheque was issued in discharge of financial liability. In M/s. Kalamani Tex & Anr vs P. Balasubramanian Criminal Appeal no. 123 of 2021 the Supreme Court has held that accused cannot rebut the statutory presumption under section 139 NI Act merely saying that alleged cheque was a blank cheque particularly when he admitted his signature bearing on the cheque.

Even if we take the arguments raised by the appellants at face value that only a blank cheque and signed blank stamp papers were given to the respondent, yet the statutory presumption cannot be obliterated

M/s. Kalamani Tex & Anr vs P. Balasubramanian Criminal Appeal no. 123 of 2021

The Statute mandates that once the signature(s) of an accused on the cheque/negotiable instrument are established, then these ‘reverse onus’ clauses become operative. In such a situation, the obligation shifts upon the accused to discharge the presumption imposed upon him.

M/s. Kalamani Tex & Anr vs P. Balasubramanian Criminal Appeal no. 123 of 2021

Once the 2nd Appellant had admitted his signatures on the cheque and the Deed, the trial Court ought to have presumed that the cheque was issued as consideration for a legally enforceable debt.

M/s. Kalamani Tex & Anr vs P. Balasubramanian Criminal Appeal no. 123 of 2021

Blank cheque would attract presumption under section 139

In Bir Singh v. Mukesh Kumar (2019) 4 SCC 197 the Supreme Court holds that Even a blank cheque leaf, voluntarily signed and handed over by the accused, which is towards some payment, would attract presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, in the absence of any cogent evidence to show that the cheque was not issued in discharge of a debt.

Therefore, court cannot seek evidence from the complainant to prove that alleged cheque was issued in discharge of debt or other liability. The complainant is entitled to take the benefit of section 139 NI Act. Presumption will attract in favour of complainant that cheque was issued in discharge of debt or other liability. It is liability of accused to prove that there was no debt or liability existed at the time of issuance of cheque. The accused has to prove that the said cheque was not issued in discharge of debt or other liability.

shivendra pratap singh advocate

Shivendra Pratap Singh

Advocate

Practising lawyer in the High Court Lucknow. You can consult on Criminal, Civil, Matrimonial, Writ, Service matters, Property, Revenue and RERA related issues.

More For you

Section 142 NI Act

Section 142: Cognizance of offences (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974),— (a) no court shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under Section 138 except upon a complaint, in writing, made by the payee or,...

Section 138: Negotiable Instrument Act

Section 138: Dishonour of cheque for insufficiency, etc, of funds in the account Where any cheque drawn by a person on an account maintained by him with a banker for payment of any amount of money to another person from out of that account for the discharge, in whole...

Cheque bounce due to the closure of account

I have given 28000 to my friend after some time he gave me a cheque. When I presented that cheque to the bank for its encashment, it became dishonoured due to the closure of the account. However, I have his bike ok and RTO papers and want to recover that amount by...

A company committed offence under section 138 N I Act

When a company issued a cheque and it is dishonoured by the drawee bank it is said that offence under section 138 of the negotiable instrument act, is committed by the company. But company cannot be prosecuted for the offence because it is a legal entity and no physical punishment can be imposed upon a company.

How to file a complaint under the NI Act

Dishonour of cheque is an offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act. Section 142 of the Negotiable Instrument Act enunciates about the cognizance of the offence committed under section 138 of the N I Act. The court shall take cognizance only on the complaint in writing filed by the payee or the holder in due course of the cheque.

Trial of cheque bounce case

I like to file a check bounce case in fast track court. Is there any specific procedure for applying a case in fast track court? Will I get a quick judgement than the normal court? ( I have heard check bounce cases pending for 3 years in normal court). Is it possible...

Cheque bounce case

Within what time can I expect justice for a check bounce case? (either I have to get money or action against the person who issued the check) . a. if he fails to pay, what would be the minimum and maximum legal action against that person? What would be the approximate...

Kanoonirai has been advising in legal issues since October 2014. You can consult a lawyer through online media, telephonic consultation and video conferencing.

Contact

mail[at]kanoonirai.com
+91-91400-4[nine][six]54