N I Act
V. Ramakrishna
(Querist) 30 March 2011
This query is : Resolved
Dear Experts,,,
To me the Magistrat at Chennai , has given a split judgement in my case u/s
138 .I am the accused .
The cheque is from my PVT LTD company duely signed by me as Director of the PVT LTD company .In the compliant A1 is the Company ,A2 is myself .
The Complianant has not stated in any of the documents to whom the money was paid ,when the money was paid ,no supporting exibits produced,not even stated that signatory of the cheque ,i.e myself was in charge of day to day affires of the company , has got only the cheque and further states that cheque itself is coclusive proof of having commited a crime u/s 138.
leaving detailes of the judgement aside for the time ,judgemnt says
1) A1 is Acquitted .
2)A2 is guilty .with 1 year RI and fine of Rs 5000//
I have paid the fine and got bail .
I think I have got 30 days time for appeal.I strongly feel the judgement is wrong .
I am given to understand there is a recent Supreme court judgement on the legality of the above judgement or against it .
In any case I would be greatfull to get expert comments , whether my appeal
can set aside the judgement
I would also be greatful if the SC judement is uploaded , so that I may prepare the appeal correctly .
Regards
Ramakrishna.V.
Advocate. Arunagiri
(Expert) 31 March 2011
My opinion is that the Magistrate is correct.
When you are the signatory for the company as a director, it is not necessary to prove that you are in charge of day to day operations.
As per s.139 of the NI Act, the complainant need not prove his case, only the accused has to rebut the charges.
Sri Vijayan.A
(Expert) 31 March 2011
I am also having the same opinion as opined by Mr.Arunagiri.
However, correct opinion can be had after going thru the order only.
Hence you are advised to contact a local lawyer with all details.
Advocate. Arunagiri
(Expert) 31 March 2011
If you prefer an appeal you can post a Personal message to my Email ID.
