Dishonour of security cheque commits no offence under section 138 NI Act

Question asked on: 30/07/2019

I have taken a loan from bajaj finseve. I gave three cheques for security purpose. I paid 18 EMI on time. From last few months, I was not able to pay EMI. They filed the cheque and deposited to the bank, which dishonoured due to insufficient balance.

Moreover, they filed a case against me. What will be the next procedure? The SI is calling me. I m not able to pay. What to do, kindly assist me.

Advised by: Shivendra Pratap Singh,

If the Bajaj Finserv had accepted those cheques for the security purpose, therefore, Bajaj could not present in the bank for its encashment. The Security Check never issued in the discharge of debt or liability. According to Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, when the cheque issues for the discharge of debt or liability thereupon offence commits if the drawer does not honour the cheque.

Presumption of debt or liability

Under the Negotiable Instrument Act, the cheque is a valuable instrument. Therefore the law presumes that when a person issues a cheque, he wants to discharge his debt or liability. In order to give that effect section, 139 NI Act creates a presumption of debt and liability in favour of the holder of the cheque.

Upon perusal of the facts and circumstances of your case, it infers that you fell in debt at the time of issue of the cheque. Therefore, the burden of proof shifted upon you to prove that the cheque was a security cheque. In the absence of such proof, the court shall presume that it was not a security cheque.

In Indus Airways (P) Ltd. v. Magnum Aviation (P) Ltd., (2014) 12 SCC 539 the Supreme Court of India held that if there was no debt on liability at the time of issue of cheque then no criminal liability will arise under section 138 upon dishonour of that cheque.

Security cheque

Whether the cheque was a security cheque or not depends upon the nature of the transaction. If the transaction shows that the maker of cheque wanted to discharge his debt or liability, then he cannot withdraw from it at the subsequent stage [Balaji Seafoods Exports (India) Ltd. v. Mac Industries Ltd., (1999) 1 CTC 6 ].

If you have evidence to prove that the cheques were not issued in discharge of debt, then no criminal liability will arise under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act [Indus Airways (P) Ltd. v. Magnum Aviation (P) Ltd., (2014) 12 SCC 539]. However, it is not possible for you because you have admitted that you have taken a loan from the Bajaj Finserv. When you failed to pay the EMI after that Bajaj presented them for encashment. There was indeed some financial liability upon you. Therefore, the bajaj finserv rightly given in the discharge of responsibility.

It would be right for you to contact the Bajaj for settlement of the debt. If the Bajaj Finserv agrees, then you should prepare a settlement deed. You may produce that settlement deed before the court and seek some more time. The Bajaj will compound the case after receiving the whole due amount.

Complaint case

It is a complaint case. Therefore, sub-inspector has no power to investigate this offence. If the sub-inspector calls you, make a complaint to the superintendent of police against him. According to Section 142 of the negotiable instrument, the judicial magistrate of the first class of the metropolitan magistrate has the power to take cognisance. No FIR needed for an offence committed under section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act.

Ask Your Question

Shivendra Pratap Singh

Advocate, Lucknow

Advice: 16931

Consultation: 3367

section 138 of the negotiable instrument act 1881

My friend issued a cheque for discharge of his liability but it is dishonoured due to insufficient fund. I want to know that when it can be said that offence under section 138 has committed.  Dishonour of cheque is an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable...

Trial of cheque bounce case

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

Section 142 of The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881

I am a software engineer and working in Infosys. One of my colleagues met financial hardship and requested from me to give five lakh rupees. I remitted that amount in his bank account. I have evidence to prove that he took an unsecured loan from me. After seven months...

Cheque bounce case

Within what period of 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...

When can I file complaint in cheque bounce case

When can I file complaint for the offence of dishonour of cheque? Dishonouring of cheque for insufficiency of fund in the account is generally called bounce of cheque. Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act 1881 envisages bounce of cheque is an offence and also...

Dishonour of security cheque is no offence under N I Act

I gave loan to my friend and at the same time, he issued a cheque of the equal amount of loan for the security of the loan. However, I was quite sure that he will return that amount in 2 months but he failed to return. I made some query regarding repayment of the loan...

Dishonour of security cheque commits no offence under section 138 NI Act

I have taken a loan from bajaj finseve. I gave three cheques for security purpose. I paid 18 EMI on time. From last few months, I was not able to pay EMI. They filed the cheque and deposited to the bank, which dishonoured due to insufficient balance. Moreover, they...

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

Whether a company is liable for the offence of cheque dishonour under section 138 of NI 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...

quick Advice

Get A Quick Advice

Book an appointment for 15 minutes and consult with an expert over the phone within minutes

Talk to Advocate Shivendra

Book a phone consultation for 30 minutes and get solid advice on the phone

Book it Now