How to defend cheque bouncing case

Question

How to defend cheque bouncing case

Hello sir,
My self navin bhatt from delhi
I had my bussiness in haldwani(nainital)
due to some family reasons i was not able to run my bussiness and in big loss, i had borrowed respectively 100000,500000,and 300000 from three money lender in 2013. And was paying interest properly on monthly basis till march 2017,seeing my bad financial situation they all forced me to repay full amount when i requested them to give some time they were much intolerence and they were already increased my interest rate starting from 2% per month to 10% per month and by any how i had managed to pay till 2017 march. As on march 2017 the amount i had paid as interest is one and half time of the princple borrowed .they are still increasing the interest on per month basis and threatening me, as result i had to leave my home and shut down the bussiness and moved to delhi,and then i requested them again to cooperate and settel the matter but they are threatning me because they have my non dated blank cheques and blank stamp papers as security,they had taken one blank cheque and one blank stamp per 50000.
how should i defend and save myself

Asked 8 years ago in Criminal Law

Religion: Hindu

Answer 1

1. Are they registered moneylenders?. Whatever may be, even registered moneylenders cannot change exorbitant rate of interest.

2. Lodge a Police complaint against the moneylenders for forcibly taking your blank undated cheques and blank stamp paper.

3. As per your narration you have already paid one and half times the principal amount and the receipts/acknowledgements obtained from the moneylenders can be produced to the statutory authorities at the appropriate time while lodging a complaint against the moneylenders.

Shashidhar S. Sastry

Advocate, Bangalore

5623 Answers

338 Consultations

Talk to Advocate Shashidhar S. Sastry

Answer 2

1. according to the negotiable instrument act, cheque should be issued in discharge of liability which is legally incurred.

2. in your case, if money lender has no licence they cannot proceed under section 138 becasuse without money lending licence they cannot receive interest thereupon. it they have licence then they cannot claim interest more than 3% simple interest.

3. you should challenge the proceeding on the ground that cheque was not issued in legal discharge of liability. then you cannot be prosecuted.

Shivendra Pratap Singh

Advocate, Lucknow

5127 Answers

78 Consultations

Talk to Advocate Shivendra Pratap Singh

Answer 3

1. You Are in debt trap and taking loan from financiers was your biggest mistake..

2.Now if the cheque bounce case is filed you would not find it easy to defend as drawing of cheque itself means that you are in debt under them.

3. Only escape route appears to negotiate and settle with them.

Devajyoti Barman

Advocate, Kolkata

23647 Answers

537 Consultations

Talk to Advocate Devajyoti Barman

Answer 4

stop making payment

2) let them fill in the cherque amount and deposit the cheque

3) as and when cheque is dishonoured on presentation they would issue you legal notice

4) reply to legal notice denying your liability to pay amount mentioned in cheque

5) mention that you have repaid the amount as evident from cheques issued for repayment

6) cheque bouncing cases take 5 years to be disposed of

Ajay Sethi

Advocate, Mumbai

Available Now

99755 Answers

8141 Consultations

Talk to Advocate Ajay Sethi NOW!

Answer 5

Is there any other evidence other than the blank cheque and the stamp paper?

I mean any loan agreement or evidence for advancing loan.

If there is no evidence for loan, don't worry let them file cheque bounce, you can challenge the case properly with the help of a skilled lawyer.

T Kalaiselvan

Advocate, Vellore

89957 Answers

2490 Consultations

Talk to Advocate T Kalaiselvan

Answer 6

You continue to be liable in case complaint is filed against you under section 138 NI

However as far as recovery proceedings are concerned once you are declared as insolvent recovery proceedings would not be maintainable