Legally enforcable debt is a good defense for all the accused of cheque bounce cases. Though in this case the amount was huge but still for lower amounts defense for legally enforable debt can be taken and accused can win.

A similar example of legally enforcable debt - a cheque of RS TWO THOUSAND ONLY was bounced, , complaint filed . It was a prestige case for both since if the complainant wins that apart from conviction the accused may loose leased property due to default in rent payment. So complaint was assailed on the point of 1)legality of rent 2) no rent reciepts for earlier and later payment of rents and 3) complainant could not prove for which month the rent was due far want of accounts.

SO POWER OF DEFENSE IS IMMENSE. SINCE IT IS POWER OF DARKNESS AND HENCE PERPETUAL.

"Income Tax return is not a very important evidence for cheque rebounce."

YES.

Roja Vs. Bothra case

Every case law has a defferent story and hence can not be applied as rule to all.

If money is not disclosed in IT returns it is major flaw and can bu used on multiple angles by the accused.

We have won last cases of cheque / ECS bounce last week in favor of accused against mighty multinational banks having fleet of legal professionals on technical points alone.

As a rule in over confidence complainant make lot of mistakes in filing complaints perticularly for cheque / ECS bounce cases and they thereafter they try to trap the accused at lok adalat / mediation for compromise for time barred and non mainatainable cases.

If proper care is taken such cases can be forced to be withdrawn or dismissed on technical issues.

 WE CAN PROVIDE GUIDANCE , HOW TO DO IT IN INDIVIDUAL CASES IF ALL DOCUMENTS ARE AVAILABLE.