Supreme Court: Multiple Cases Alone Cannot Justify an Externment Order  ||  Supreme Court: Certiorari Can Quash a Tribunal Decision That is Grossly Perverse  ||  Supreme Court: Informant’s Consent is Not Required to Quash a Case Settled With the Victim  ||  Madras High Court: False Posts Against a Minister are Not an Offence Without Intent to Cause Alarm  ||  Delhi High Court: Police Cannot Pick and Choose Among Accused Persons for Arrest  ||  J&K High Court: Bar Associations are Not ‘State’ under Article 12 and are Outside Writ Jurisdiction  ||  Calcutta High Court: Third Parties Can Challenge Inaction Against Unauthorised Construction  ||  Madras High Court: Being an Advocate Does Not Mean a Person Cannot Commit an Offence  ||  Delhi High Court: Husband Cannot Reopen Settled Marital Disputes to Avoid Maintenance Liability  ||  Calcutta High Court: State Cannot Deny CRMI Seats to Foreign Medical Graduates Citing Stipend Costs    

SC: Statement of Accused Not Substantive Evidence of Defence to Rebut Presumption u/s 139 NI Act - (10 Mar 2021)

BANKING

Supreme Court has stated that the statement of the accused recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is not a substantive evidence of defence to rebut the presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 that the cheques were issued for consideration.

Tags : SUPREME COURT   EVIDENCE OF DEFENCE TO REBUT PRESUMPTION U/S 139 NI ACT  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved