• 138 N I ACT

Dear sir, I had filed complaint u/s 200 for offence punishable u/s 138 ni act. the accused is the signatary of the cheque, who has issued 3 cheques of rs 1 lac+1 lac + 4.25 lacs in favor of complainant  as part payment, for having purchased electronic goods worth rs approximately 25 lacs,     that 2 cheques have been dishonored for insufficient funds and 1 cheque is dishonored for the reason  signature verifies . altogether one case filed . now accused has taken up contention that he is not the owner ,  he has signed as manager, but he has signed  on the cheque as proprietor ,  but as per records of the bank he himself has issued several cheques which have been honoured  by the bank earlier, now he is defending as signature verifies and i  m not the owner of the firm, that he has opened the firm in two names , so pls suggest me   of , signature has varied on the cheque.any  case laws on on this point,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Asked 13 days ago in Criminal Law from gadag, Karnataka
Religion: Hindu
1) cheques have been issued by accused in his capacity as proprietor 

2) accused would be liable to make payment and can be convicted in case he fails to make payment 

3) even if signature differs accused would be liable 
Ajay Sethi
Advocate, Mumbai
23151 Answers
1216 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
 Laxmi Dyechem v. State of Gujarat, (2012) 13 SCC 375 : 2013 Cri LJ 3288,

he Supreme Court observed as under:

“The above line of decisions leaves no room for holding that the two contingencies envisaged under Section 138 of the Act must be interpreted strictly or literally. We find ourselves in respectful agreement with the decision in Magma case that the expression “amount of money … is insufficient” appearing in Section 138 of the Act is a genus and dishonour for reasons such “as account closed”, “payment stopped”, “referred to the drawer” are only species of that genus. Just as dishonour of a cheque on the ground that the account has been closed is a dishonour falling in the first contingency referred to in Section 138, so also dishonour on the ground that the “signatures do not match” or that the “image is not found”, which too implies that the specimen signatures do not match the signatures on the cheque would constitute a dishonour within the meaning of Section 138 of the Act.”


n offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act may be made out even where the cheque has been returned unpaid on the ground of signature difference.
Ajay Sethi
Advocate, Mumbai
23151 Answers
1216 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Do not worry his defence of this nature will not be entertained in court.
Show the court past transaction of him as owner of the firm.
If he challenges the signature then send this to FSL for expert opinion.
Once his signature is allowed you will win case for sure.
So do not worry and continue your case will all vigour and sincerity.
Devajyoti Barman
Advocate, Kolkata
5179 Answers
54 Consultations
4.9 on 5.0
1. In a cheque bounce prosecution there is a presumption that the cheque in question was issued in discharge of legal liability, which is rebuttable by the accused. You have to prove that he was legally liable to pay you the amount covered by the cheque, in partial or full discharge of which he had issued the cheques in question. 

2. The citations can be searched by your goodself also by doing a google search as without perusal of pleadings it is not possible to decide which citation would attract to the case.
Ashish Davessar
Advocate, Jaipur
18061 Answers
447 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
now accused has taken up contention that he is not the owner ,  he has signed as manager, but he has signed  on the cheque as proprietor ,  but as per records of the bank he himself has issued several cheques which have been honoured  by the bank earlier, now he is defending as signature verifies and i  m not the owner of the firm, that he has opened the firm in two names , so pls suggest me   of , signature has varied on the cheque.any  case laws on on this point,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

The accused can take any defence to protect himself, it will not be final.
his matter is to be decided during cross examination if he is coming out  with defence witness.
This is a usual defence.
Your lawyer should handle such issues and should not have allowed this thing to eat your brain.
T Kalaiselvan
Advocate, Vellore
13948 Answers
127 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
now in above case the matter is posted for arguments , i have examined bank managers , the accused has not led any evidence for his defence 

Your advocate will provide citations on this matter as per the prevailing circumstances by looking for an appropriate citation.
You can rely upon him
T Kalaiselvan
Advocate, Vellore
13948 Answers
127 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0

Ask a Lawyer

Get legal answers from top-rated lawyers in 1 hour. It's quick, easy, and anonymous!
Ask a Lawyer

Criminal Lawyers

T Kalaiselvan
Advocate, Vellore
13948 Answers
127 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Ashish Davessar
Advocate, Jaipur
18061 Answers
447 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Krishna Kishore Ganguly
Advocate, Kolkata
12077 Answers
228 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Devajyoti Barman
Advocate, Kolkata
5179 Answers
54 Consultations
4.9 on 5.0
Nadeem Qureshi
Advocate, New Delhi
3522 Answers
129 Consultations
4.9 on 5.0
Rajgopalan Sripathi
Advocate, Hyderabad
868 Answers
43 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Atulay Nehra
Advocate, Noida
433 Answers
15 Consultations
4.7 on 5.0
Shivendra Pratap Singh
Advocate, Lucknow
2731 Answers
41 Consultations
4.9 on 5.0
Ajay N S
Advocate, Ernakulam
1910 Answers
19 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Thresiamma G. Mathew
Advocate, Mumbai
1316 Answers
85 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0