U/s 138

If the signature is that of accused than you have to prove how the cheque has gone in custody of complainant.

Execution of the cheque is different from the signature on it. The complainant also can be made to prove the execution of cheque depending on defense proposed by you.

When the accused person hands over the cheque duly signed in blank to the complainant , he also gives him the authority to fill in the cheque , otherwise he would have himself filled in all the particulars of the cheque .There is no question of forgery in filling the cheque duly signed  under the circumstances.

Sir, Thanks for the response. Actually, few investors invested money in a company for online forex trading without proper agreement as they did not receive any money receipt for the they invested. When the companyfled cheating those investors, ,having no alternate, they forcefully took signed cheques from one of the TRADER (employee) and filed case u/s 138 N I Act after writting their names and date in the cheques.

Taking the cheque forcefully is certainly a criminal offense !!!

Taking the cheque forcefully is certainly a criminal offense !!!

Then filing of FIR should have been the only answer.

Sir, in pleader's notice the name of the complainant was written as "DIPAK DUTTA", but at the time of filling of the case, the name is written as "DIPAK SARMA" (ACTUAL NAME which is same as in the cheque). Now, i want to know if that NOTICE will be considered by COURT as GENUINE one?