Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2023 (9) TMI 169

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ect. Recently, in case of MALKEET SINGH GILL VERSUS THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [ 2022 (7) TMI 1455 - SUPREME COURT] , the Supreme Court observed There has to be well-founded error which is to be determined on the merits of individual case. It is also well settled that while considering the same, the Revisional Court does not dwell at length upon the facts and evidence of the case to reverse those findings. Accused Manoj Kumar has not challenged receipt of loan amount of Rs.2,60,000/- under the Vehicle Loan Scheme. Rather, in examination of accused under Section 313 of CrPC, he had specifically admitted that he has taken loan of Rs.2,60,000/- from the complainant Bank under Vehicle Loan Scheme. Therefore, learned Trial Court and Appellat .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... State Co-operative Bank Ltd. had filed a complaint for offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act alleging that Manoj Kumar had issued Cheque No.281861 dated 26/09/2003 for an amount of Rs.36,000/- towards repayment of loan taken under the Vehicle Purchase Scheme. This Cheque No.261861 dated 26/09/2003 was presented for encashment but was dishonored due to insufficient fund in the account of accused Manoj Kumar. Complainant issued demand notice dated 10/10/2003. Despite service of notice, Manoj Kumar failed to pay the amount of cheque, therefore, complaint was filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gwalior. (2) On completion of trial, after hearing both the parties, learned Judicial Magistrate F .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 1882 dated 15.09.2007 for amount of Rs. 1,27,000/-, but the complainant failed to explain the amount of loan which was to be recovered from the accused, therefore, existence of legally recoverable liability was not made out. C. The Appellate Court accepted the Appeal Nos.291 of 2011 and 293 of 2011 which were filed on the same ground and acquitted the accused therein, but rejected the appeal in the instant case which is grave error of law. On aforesaid grounds, the impugned judgment of the trial Court as well as the Appellate Court deserves to be set aside. Learned counsel for petitioner contends that the complainant failed to submit details of loan outstanding against the accused, therefore, existence of legally recoverable debt o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ppreciation of the material and evidence brought on record. The High Court in criminal revision against conviction is not supposed to exercise the jurisdiction alike to the Appellate court and the scope of interference in revision is extremely narrow. Section 397 of the Criminal Procedure Code (in short CrPC ) vests jurisdiction for the purpose of satisfying itself or himself as to the correctness, legality or propriety of any finding, sentence or order, recorded or passed, and as to the regularity of any proceedings of such inferior court. The object of the provision is to set right a patent defect or an error of jurisdiction or law. There has to be well-founded error which is to be determined on the merits of individual case. It is also .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ty Vs. Reni C. Kottaram reported in (2013) 1 SCC 327 and M.S. Narayana Menon Vs. State of Kerala reported in AIR 2006 SC 3366, contends that the complainant failed to submit details of loan outstanding against the accused, therefore, presumption of legally recoverable debt or liability stand rebutted. Accused Manoj Kumar has not challenged receipt of loan amount of Rs.2,60,000/- under the Vehicle Loan Scheme. Rather, in examination of accused under Section 313 of CrPC, he had specifically admitted that he has taken loan of Rs.2,60,000/- from the complainant Bank under Vehicle Loan Scheme. Therefore, learned Trial Court and Appellate Court have not committed mistake in drawing presumption of existence of legally enforceable liability in f .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates