Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 with Section 138

Supreme Court clarifies liability of non-executive directors under Section 138 NI Act in cheque dishonor cases: K.S. Mehta vs. M/S Morgan Securities (2025) INSC 315 (March 4, 2025)

/ B. V. Nagarathna, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 482, Judges, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 with Section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 with Section 141, Satish Chandra Sharma

Date of the Judgment: March 4, 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 315 Judges: B. V. Nagarathna, J., Satish Chandra Sharma, J. Can a non-executive director of a company be held liable for cheque dishonor under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881? The Supreme Court addressed this critical question in the case of K.S. Mehta […]

Supreme Court clarifies liability of non-executive directors under Section 138 NI Act in cheque dishonor cases: K.S. Mehta vs. M/S Morgan Securities (2025) INSC 315 (March 4, 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Complaint Filed by Manager in Cheque Dishonor Case: M/S Naresh Potteries vs. M/S Aarti Industries (2025) INSC 1

/ B.R. Gavai, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 200, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 482, Judges, K. V. Viswanathan, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 with Section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 with Section 142

Date of the Judgment: January 2, 2025 Citation: (2025) INSC 1 Judges: B.R. Gavai, J., K. V. Viswanathan, J. Can a company’s manager, authorized by a power of attorney, file a cheque dishonor complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this question. The court clarified

Supreme Court Upholds Complaint Filed by Manager in Cheque Dishonor Case: M/S Naresh Potteries vs. M/S Aarti Industries (2025) INSC 1 Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies definition of ‘Drawer’ under Section 148 of Negotiable Instruments Act: Bijay Agarwal vs. M/s Medilines (21 October 2024)

/ Code of Criminal Procedure, Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 389, Dishonour of Cheques, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 with Section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 with Section 148

Supreme Court Clarifies ‘Drawer’ Definition in NI Act Appeals: Bijay Agarwal vs. M/s Medilines (2024) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an authorized signatory of a company can be considered a ‘drawer’ of a cheque under Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. CASE TYPE: Criminal Appeal (Cheque Dishonour) Case Name: Bijay Agarwal vs. M/s Medilines Judgment

Supreme Court clarifies definition of ‘Drawer’ under Section 148 of Negotiable Instruments Act: Bijay Agarwal vs. M/s Medilines (21 October 2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court dismisses arbitration petition due to limitation: Elfit Arabia vs. Concept Hotel BARONS (2024) INSC 536 (09 July 2024)

/ Arbitration Law, Arbitration Law with Section 11(6), Arbitration Law with Section 21, Arbitration Law with Section 43, Limitation Act, 1963, Limitation Act, 1963 with Article 55, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 with Section 138

Supreme Court dismisses arbitration petition due to limitation: Elfit Arabia vs. Concept Hotel BARONS (2024) INSC 536 (09 July 2024) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a court can reject an arbitration petition at the referral stage if the claim is ex-facie barred by limitation. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: Elfit Arabia & Anr vs. Concept Hotel

Supreme Court dismisses arbitration petition due to limitation: Elfit Arabia vs. Concept Hotel BARONS (2024) INSC 536 (09 July 2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Cheque Dishonor Case: Rajco Steel Enterprises vs. Kavita Saraff (2024) INSC 288

/ Burden of Proof, Cheque Dishonor, Criminal Law, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 with Section 118, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 with Section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 with Section 139

Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Cheque Dishonor Case: Rajco Steel Enterprises vs. Kavita Saraff (2024) INSC 288 LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the accused successfully rebutted the presumption of guilt in a cheque dishonor case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, when the complainant failed to prove the existence of a legally enforceable debt.

Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Cheque Dishonor Case: Rajco Steel Enterprises vs. Kavita Saraff (2024) INSC 288 Read Post »

Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings Despite Complainant’s Refusal to Compound: Raj Reddy Kallem vs. State of Haryana (2024)

/ Code of Criminal Procedure, Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 156(3), Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 482, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 420, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 with Section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 with Section 147, Offences Against Property

Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings Despite Complainant’s Refusal to Compound: Raj Reddy Kallem vs. State of Haryana (2024) Date of the Judgment: April 08, 2024 Citation: 2024 INSC 347 Judges: A.S. Bopanna, J., Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. Can a criminal case be quashed even if the complainant refuses to settle, especially when the accused has repaid

Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings Despite Complainant’s Refusal to Compound: Raj Reddy Kallem vs. State of Haryana (2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Discretionary Power of Interim Compensation Under Section 143A of Negotiable Instruments Act: Rakesh Ranjan Srivastava vs. State of Jharkhand (2024)

/ Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 421, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 with Section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 with Section 143A, Offences Relating to Cheque Dishonour, Trial Procedure

Supreme Court Clarifies Discretionary Power of Interim Compensation Under Section 143A of Negotiable Instruments Act: Rakesh Ranjan Srivastava vs. State of Jharkhand (2024) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the provision for interim compensation under Section 143A(1) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is mandatory or discretionary. CASE TYPE: Criminal (Cheque Dishonour) Case Name: Rakesh Ranjan Srivastava vs.

Supreme Court Clarifies Discretionary Power of Interim Compensation Under Section 143A of Negotiable Instruments Act: Rakesh Ranjan Srivastava vs. State of Jharkhand (2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court Quashes Cheque Bounce Case Against Director: Susela Padmavathy Amma vs. Bharti Airtel (2024)

/ Cheque Dishonour, Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 with Section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 with Section 141, Quashing of Criminal Proceedings

Supreme Court Quashes Cheque Bounce Case Against Director: Susela Padmavathy Amma vs. Bharti Airtel (2024) Date of the Judgment: March 15, 2024 Citation: 2024 INSC 206 Judges: B.R. Gavai, J. and Sandeep Mehta, J. Can a company director be held liable in a cheque bounce case simply by virtue of their position? The Supreme Court

Supreme Court Quashes Cheque Bounce Case Against Director: Susela Padmavathy Amma vs. Bharti Airtel (2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court Quashes Abetment to Suicide Charges: Mohit Singhal vs. State of Uttarakhand (2023)

/ Abetment of Suicide, Abetment to Suicide, Criminal Law, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 107, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 306, Instigation, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 with Section 138

Supreme Court Quashes Abetment to Suicide Charges: Mohit Singhal vs. State of Uttarakhand (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether demanding repayment of a loan and using abusive language constitutes abetment to suicide under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). CASE TYPE: Criminal Law. Case Name: Mohit Singhal & Anr. vs. The State of Uttarakhand &

Supreme Court Quashes Abetment to Suicide Charges: Mohit Singhal vs. State of Uttarakhand (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies vicarious liability under Section 141 of NI Act in cheque bounce case: Siby Thomas vs. Somany Ceramics Ltd. (2023)

/ Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 with Section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 with Section 141, Vicarious Liability

Supreme Court clarifies vicarious liability under Section 141 of NI Act in cheque bounce case: Siby Thomas vs. Somany Ceramics Ltd. (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Vicarious liability of partners in a partnership firm under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, in cases of cheque dishonor. CASE TYPE: Criminal (Cheque Dishonor) Case Name: Siby Thomas

Supreme Court clarifies vicarious liability under Section 141 of NI Act in cheque bounce case: Siby Thomas vs. Somany Ceramics Ltd. (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Grants Anticipatory Bail in Bank Fraud Case: Mahdoom Bava vs. CBI (20 March 2023)

/ Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 120B, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 420, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 467, Judges, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 with Section 138, Pankaj Mithal, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 with Section 13, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Grants Anticipatory Bail in Bank Fraud Case: Mahdoom Bava vs. CBI (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Grant of Anticipatory Bail, especially when custodial interrogation was not required during investigation. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Mahdoom Bava vs. Central Bureau of Investigation Judgment Date: 20 March 2023 Date of the Judgment: 20 March 2023 Citation: (2023)

Supreme Court Grants Anticipatory Bail in Bank Fraud Case: Mahdoom Bava vs. CBI (20 March 2023) Read Post »

Scroll to Top