Blank cheque proof

sir, please help

Dear Mr. Raju,

It is the crucial and burning problem faced and being faced by almost all the accused today in several bundles of cases under Section 138 of The Negotiable Instruments Act. Your task is completed by asking the question of a single line. But it is not as simple as you expect to give answer like 'Yes or No' question. Receiving blank signed cheque as a security by the creditor at the time of lending money is not by itself an offence. Similarly if the said creditor fills up the cheque even in his own handwriting and asks you to honour the same is also not an offence. What you have to prove is that your blank signed cheque is being given as a security to your creditor and that your creditor has filled the same up without your knowledge and that you are not liable to pay such much money contemplated under the cheque. For this you have to gather cogent evidence in your favour which goes to prove that you are not liable to pay any thing to your creditor or that the amount mentioned in the cheque exceeds the real liability and so on.

Kindly make it a note to give as many details as possible while posting queries.

Hope you got it.

Truly Yours,

G. YADAGIRI SHARMA,

                                  M. Com., LL.M.,

G. AMRUTHA KUMARI,

                                   M. Com., LL.M.,

ADVOCATES

H. No. 2-1-178/1, 100 Feet Road

Vidyaranyapuri, Hanumakonda.

WARANGAL DISTRICT – 506 001

: 98 493 45 755 – : 99 66 45 66 85

gysharmaadv@gmail.com

My advocate told me Sec.8, 9 , 20 and 87 of NI ACT  BLANK CHEQUE IS LEGALLY VALID CHEQE.

The question is complainant did not approach the court that it was a blank cheque. During cross examination he denied that it was blank cheque.

I proved by calling the deposit slip from the Bank that handwriting on the cheque and deposit slip is same, thus proving that it was blank cheque and he filled up.

now can you please advise if this will help

respected ld lawyers,

this is a very genuine question, why no one is giving opinion, there is so many good lawyers in this forum with great experince of day to day law, this must be quite simple for them.

I repeat my query..

1. Complainant do not say anything in the complaint about cheque as filled or not filled. he just said cheque was signed and issued for Rs.XXXX.

2. During cross he denies that it was a blank cheque...exact words...I have not filled up the cheque, cheque was not blank, cheque is not in different ink. It is false to say that i have misused the blank cheque given for security.

3. in my defence, i called his bank and got the deposit slip...and handwriting on the cheque (amount in word and figure) match completely with the handwriting on deposit slip. There is his signature also on the deposit slip..

now does it prove that it was blank cheque and he lied and does this evidence by bank help me ?

Please give your valuable opinion.

Yes, it proves and ideally you should get the complainant behind the bars for perjury....

Our judicial system can only get away from obvious farce, if perjury law is implemented properly..

Magistrates pursue these cheque bounce cases as if the drawer has committed some heinous crime of murder or rape....but these magistrates forget the blatant falsehood by complainant. I urge all my learned friends not to spare any complainant who misuses or dishonestly takes advantage of S.138. Yes, dishonest drawers must also be taken to task.