Dear Laxminarayanji & Sh R Trivediji

At times it does happen that the momentary agression results in making us write what we would not normally support! Without meeting any one of you I can vouch that both of you are very refined persons!

I appeal to your nobility that irrespective of how all this got initiated, not to write anything further which defies dignity!

I would be the happiest person if I see some message from both of you that u have really left behi9nd teh acrimony and resolve to be friends of each other

Nice of you Mr  Ashok kumar for your timely advice.

Out sole purpose is to give realistic advice to solve the misery of cheque bounce victims and not just theory and what courts should have done.

The neck of the accused is below hammer and he or she has to eascape and not to learn bookish theory.

Dear Ashok Kumar,

I have no acrimony with anyone, I have not seen him and neither he has, so question of acrimony does not arise. What appalls me is the shear lack of knowledge of law and despite that people claiming that  "ANY cheque bounce case can be WON if defense is diligent". This kind of statement;  a. Is against the advocate ethics  and b. Just to attract the attention of accused.

And as far as theory is concerened even the Apex Court cannot move beyond what is stated in the statue as enacted by legislature, not even a single word can be added or deleted, if the meaning is plain and simple. Without sound knowledge of theory what kind of diligent defense can be made out is anybody's guess.

With due humility I must say, if he can find a single flaw in any of my post on legal matters, I will apologise to him, even though it is quite apparent that he is too young in this profession. As far as his posts are concerened, you yourself have indicated his contradiction in this post itself.

We feel except finding apelling mistakes you do not have basic knowledge how the criminal courts work in cheque bounce cases.

If you have even handled any chque bounce case pl give reference before filinding faults with others.

YES TRIVEDIJI

Personally I am aware that no advocate is supposed to give statements like

"ANY cheque bounce case can be WON if defense is diligent". 

U R right that an advocate cannot predict or assure the outcome of a case to his client

Going a step further, I would even say that at times even diligence does not help and one might find an adverse decision in a case where one was damn sure of a favourable decision!

No one can actually becoem a JUDGE and  it is the Judge alone who will give the verdict

Accused can come out of cheque bounce cases if proper care is taken from day one.

1)    This is a criminal case for punishment and not for recovery of money so all benefit of doubt will go to accused.

2)    Complainant make many many mistakes while sending notice and filing complaint and it is fully legal to take its benefit.

3)    Large no of advisors give this citation or that citation to give false hopes. Every higher court decision has to be read as a whole and have to understand the particular circumstances in which it was given. And most imp is if the trial court says it does not agree that particular citation is not applicable ,what the accused will do.

4)    We give full proof solutions to come out of the problem and providing solutions to the accused in any criminal case is fully legal and not banned by any law, rule or procedure.

5)    We do not publish cell nos, email ID etc etc., since we know we can solve .Those who have tried all other methods are welcome .

6)    Large no of otherwise simple law abiding people get trapped in this law since the clever complainants have devised methods to misuse it. Our efforts are to complete solutions not mere advice to come out of cheque bounce cases for the accused.

There may be spelling mistakes like the word --

diligent

but than others should have also some job and that adds spice to this site .

There are few people on this forum who have been writing:

1. Any cheque bounce case can be won.

2. Power of defense is immense {I may say power of offense (Prosecution) is equally immense}.

This amounts to giving false hopes to accused, because S.138 is one of those special laws where the onus is on the accused to rebut the presumption available to complainant. There is substantial amount of conviction under this act.

On the same vein they also argue and contradict that:

1. That S.138 is applicable on blank cheque bounce. (This is not fully true)

2. That security cheque is also covered under S.138. (This is not true at all)  

3. That S.20 is applicable on cheque.  (This is not true at all)

4. That trial court may not accept any citation of Supreme Court. (Trial court cannot overrule SC just by a statement)

(All these, which they accept, are against accused, one way they say all cases can be won and on other side they agree to above)

So my request to such people is instead of repeatedly writing such misleading statements that " Any cheque bounce case  can be won", they should use their experience come forward and give their valuable advise to querist. Mere statement that any cheque bounce case can be won, is not what accused/querist wants to hear, he wants advise, a way out. 

Spelling mistakes can be ignored, but lack of sound knowledge of vocabulary certainly hampers the proper understanding of the orders of SC/HC.

JARA SAMZA KARO

There are always big names of DEFENSE  ADVOCATES and not for prosecution advocates.

And if some body claims power of defense try to understand it since we are with all defense advocates.

Light will die down if not kept alive but darkness will always remain . Power of darkness is power of defense.

Accused of cheque bounce cases you have nothing to loose except your helpless ness and misery. You can win your case, fight properly from day one.

Whatever I have stated in defense of accused, you and the other two gentlemen have oppposed ? 

All those counsels:

1. Who got Jessica Lal murderer convicted !!

2. Who got Nitish Katara murderer convicted !!

3. Who got Afjal Guru convicted !!

4. Who got Kasab Convicted !!

5. Who will (?) get Nirbhaya rapists convicted !!

6. Who got Chautalas behind bars !!

7. Who got Kanda behind the bars !!

8. Who are fighting against Kalmadis, Rajas etc !!

List is endless, these are some of recent fresh in memory cases....

All these learned counsels should take training from Mr Laxminarain regarding Power of defense. SAMAZ GAYE !! This guy is confusing the querists by making some unethical statement like " Every cheque bounce case can be won " as if prosecution counsels are from banana republic.