1. Cheque Bounce cases. Moratorium contained in Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code applies only to Corporate Debtors. Directors are liable under Chapter XVII of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/D5BdzfNtpM2bRwkavFCeKoy3v
2. Interim compensation in cheque bounce cases. Magistrate can award compensation ranging from 1% to 20% in a cautious manner and after recording the reasons. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/eWqznVn3UfXEai9UqAbWemPFp
3. Cheque bounce cases. While considering application for grant of interim compensation, conduct of the accused is relevant. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/RQFNw9kyhigDPUNg96cvHXIqB
4. Debt or other liability under N. I. Act includes dues from any other person and not confined to debt or liability of the drawer himself.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/llvcAymD0xNVyI6Oxp3waOflW
5. Magistrate can convert trial of complaint under Section 138 only into a summons triable case and not a warrant case.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/ZBaIBBzKxUaq8cSnuXwdTXDUP
6. Gaps are permitted to be filled by the drawee on the cheque so long as it does not cause prejudice to the drawer or amount to material alteration.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/OI9XMtEe0aNjwZKJWD0Hwun6q
7. Interim compensation. Section is not retrospective. Applicable only to offences committed after its insertion.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/0EFrxltQAlkwSBvGaoxOpveRK
8. Even a blank cheque leaf voluntarily signed and handed over by the accused towards some payment would attract the Section unless contrary is proved. Supreme Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/pPkTuCll86tosFvtt1LTkzihs
9. Even a blank cheque leaf voluntarily signed and handed over by the accused towards some payment would attract presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Supreme Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/NIzbgetdJ54bLLBxjVn1WDSm5
10. Whether a cheque is issued in respect of a time barred debt is a matter for trial. Proceedings cannot be quashed on this ground. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/7bphhFPLCyWieyTYZBh9CjXY7
11. Lok Adalat award in respect of cheque bounce case. Amount can be recovered by Fine Levy Warrant under Section 421 Cr.P.C. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/7MvnKohB6twQdFnx5soDk5xw8
12. When cheque is delivered for collection within the territorial jurisdiction of a Court where the payee maintains the account, proceedings cannot be initiated in other place. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/ESSCuN0zqriQ0coMIe4zq6joZ
13. Accused can be convicted even when the legally enforceable debt is less than the amount mentioned in the cheque. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/iRevKhgtZJbeq3RFO1lh23WHC
14. Proceedings under Sections 138 and 141 cannot be initiated against Corporate debtor during the moratorium period under Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. Supreme Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/W7PQ2dZCwStxuCSsmTuJtvy3Q
15. Accused only a partner of the firm which issued cheque. Neither responsible for business conduct nor has power to open or operate bank account. Accused did not sign cheque. Proceedings liable to be quashed. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/EOkZeDYIYGyu0e0FkTjdbfFAz
16. Recording of sworn statement before taking cognizance is mandatory in cases other than complaints under Section 138 read with Section 145 Negotiable Instruments Act. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/GVQK0qjAwwLUnA4mxYe2AJLSI
17. Imprisonment ordered in default of fine in different and independent transactions. Sentence will run consecutively and NOT concurrently. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/QGrJExDOxydA37BfhSNfphOWr
18. There is NO requirement of sending notice under Certificate of Posting once the notice is sent by Registered Post Acknowledgment Due. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/uDq69hFhR7VxsJj7mwqXGq7YF
19. When there is delay in filing complaint and application under Section 142B is filed, magistrate can NOT straightaway take cognizance without issuing notice on the application. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/402pUHQke5Wak6Dx3rI0yrlFg
20. Complaint under Section 138 is not an Encyclopedia. The complainant is required to plead basic particulars to disclose commission of the offence. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/ZoV6ivb6WXCVjoJgivFN5p5Xu
21. Alteration of cheque date. If alteration is made when cheque is issued or made later with privity of parties and in the absence of any fraud, the cheque is valid and enforceable. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/FNJpXuUuJc8eMa4wrFndOohRD
22. Sentence must be proportionate to the gravity of the guilt. It must not be either exorbitant or for namesake. Karnataka High Court cancels exorbitant sentence imposed on the accused.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/00FnGMxzeH42jWPY0hxZAhTJ1
23. Notice demanding lesser amount than the cheque amount, after giving deduction to part payment, is NOT a defective notice. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/FQ7ALto65kqwMAAt2aPVdBiN8
24. Against the order of acquittal passed by the first appellate court, appeal to High Court under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C is maintainable. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/aVozOBbe9iHM7zs1Z9FMdzr1g
25. Complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act without signature of the complainant is maintainable provided the complaint is verified before the Magistrate. Supreme Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/y06pmo3f4s3GsHdMkVJECXVzn
26. Dishonour of cheque on the ground that the ”signatures do not match” or that the ”image is not found” would constitute a dishonour within the meaning of Section 138 of N.I. Act when the cheque amount is not paid despite notice. Supreme Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/1WlxemMpUnIt3LK07qHb9FzL7
27. Prosecution for dishonour of cheque issued towards time barred debt is permissible when cheque was issued under a subsequent written agreement between the parties. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/fjHyJBCNCuyfvj24ZFWHCJxn8
28. Grant of interim compensation under Section 143-A of the Negotiable Instruments Act is NOT mandatory. Court must apply its mind and record reasons to grant interim compensation. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/2q0lVtxWmlf6Cfs4VDkx9YEIN
29. The fact that the body of cheque was not filled up by accused himself-is no defence in itself when signature on the cheque is not disputed. Punjab High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/2YPG7FXSTfCKqW9N71rHLO5g0
30. Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash proceedings is maintainable even at the stage of framing charges if the Company is not made an accused. Chhattisgarh High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/soWI6GhIe7OyEvdQXIUPUKGNo
31. Complaint u/s 138 N.I. Act filed without application to condone delay. Limitation issue raised for the first time in appeal. Appellate Court can send matter back to trial court by permitting complainant to file necessary application. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/qZCAffwdcFDU3U8aYxQgqWYnS
32. All the offences under the Negotiable Instruments Act are compoundable and the parties can compound subject to payment of graded cost. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/4IfAEzY283mth5WU5Zb8rbTKi
33. Interim compensation in cheque bounce cases. Magistrate can award compensation ranging from 1% to 20% in a cautious manner and after recording the reasons. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/eWqznVn3UfXEai9UqAbWemPFp
34. Negotiable Instruments Act. Directors of a company cannot be held vicariously guilty of the offence punishable under Section 138 when the company is not arrayed as an accused in the complaint. Karnataka High Court reiterates.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/WHoWFICspEWTW6pstF6BMiiz2
35. Cheque bounce case. Directors/Chairman of a company cannot claim that they are not privy to the transaction between the accused and the complainant when the complaint clearly narrates their role in the transaction. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/GudwNeB6sfBo2i8T71uyGNtDc
36. Cheque bounce case. Taking sworn statement first then taking cognizance and issuing summons would not vitiate the proceedings. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/2OebM5gXMY9TxvLK6Kk2I9vAn
37. Special Power of Attorney holder who is aware of the transaction can initiate proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/sqsjTZ2baQSvT0u7O2G3ztabc
38. Presentation of undated cheque after three years from the date of the transaction by adding the date. Proceeding under Section 138 NI Act will be clearly barred by limitation. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/p92RNehbaj4FcwTvBLmbkS7ee
39. Persons who had ceased to be directors of company cannot be arrayed as accused in proceedings under the NI Act in respect of cheque issued by the Company. Karnataka High Court reiterates.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/D9lXfgi4nQ5IfWE2yKMlululc
40. Cheque dishonour cases. Standard of proof for accused to rebut presumption is that of ‘preponderance of probabilities’. Jharkhand High Court
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/YI1rLKHQ2jjMja35dUJSnXOQG
41. Cheque bounce case. Dishonor of cheque due to stop payment, account closed and signature mismatch would attract the penal provision. High Court of Jammu and Kashmir.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/VReS6QpSkTIY6B6pgoGoPZgHU
42. Cheque bounce case. Unless accused introduces a specific defence questioning financial capacity of complainant, Court cannot go into this question on its own and give a finding. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/O9HMqO2wIJGCtnqIpWNYPa53h
43. Cheque bounce case. Payment of interim compensation applies only in respect of offences committed after Section 143(A) of N.I.Act came into force in the statutory book. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/7e7dwYqBTENTpmAt4bFbc66IA
44. A proprietary concern is not required to be arrayed as a separate party in a proceeding under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/d9UvCQ78agpSgKW0UWzT2XTfE
45. Cheque bounce case. Payment of interim compensation applies only in respect of offenses committed after Section 143(A) of N.I.Act came into force in the statutory book. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/gT4K6EBZvciSqyFu8fa6s6DM3
46. Cheque bounce case. Complainant is not expected to appear on every date of hearing and the Court cannot dismiss the complaint for default on that ground. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/KGqfPftJkB8oyevEyMmAlhDr4
47. Cheque bounce case. Partnership firm cannot be held liable for dishonour of the cheque issued by a partner in his individual capacity. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/7JAONypVR8L6iMXI4CQGskK2f
48. Wife cannot be held liable under the N.I Act for dishonour of the cheque issued by her husband though the loan transaction is joint. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/NXZQdnu9usb20xbkfvcWDDBrP
49. Violation of the Income Tax Act in monetary transaction cannot be a defence in proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/clU7K2ymkWsjGEFL1m4JIGy6z
50. Where there are clear averments in statutory notice and complaint about the role of the directors and their responsibility, proceedings cannot be quashed merely on the plea that they had no direct role in the transaction. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/Gzhnnysvgb1C2sJHiQBdMYdS2
51. Director of a company is not liable for prosecution under Section 138 of NI Act without the company being arraigned as an accused. Supreme Court reiterates.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/GBsFa6mijxSRJHZVqERDUiyP3
52. Though accused are to be acquitted in cheque bounce case on technical ground, the complainant is entitled to receive the amount deposited in the court. Kerala High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/ReS8Bz3LfyvKSkSVw2aGOnjtW
53. In the case of a proprietorship concern, only the proprietor can be held liable under Section 138 of the Act. No need to array the Firm since the proprietorship concern and the proprietor are one and the same. Punjab and Haryana High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/0uRiX4sfM6sTjT79R7hT449ZM
54. Failure to reach out of court settlement cannot be a ground to order conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Supreme Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/TdgQvQMZ9kjPbOhXjO8gB2xLE
55. Negotiable Instruments Act. Cheque issued on the account of Co-Operative Society. Complaint filed against the officers without making Co-Operative society a party. Proceedings are liable to be quashed. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/7vfz5mkNq4OXy1HQr57i593Op
56. Conviction under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 cannot be questioned under Section 482 Cr.P.C when appeal remedy is available. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/PykvUfZDymcfFrzBaqgLBAT4p
57. Negotiable Instruments Act. Section 138. Once NBW is issued against accused, the complainant need NOT take any further steps till NBW is executed or returned. Complaint can NOT be dismissed for not taking steps. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/rFB9jsyXzIEPZSEAw836bcs3t
58. Negotiable Instruments Act. Dishonour of cheque issued by outgoing/retired partner does NOT bind the partnership firm or other partners. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/jLd4Lidz1LZbSMbqMhr3wsa68
59. Cheque bounce cases. While considering application for grant of interim compensation, conduct of the accused is relevant. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/RQFNw9kyhigDPUNg96cvHXIqB
60. Court cannot place accused exparte in cheque bounce cases and proceed with the trial. Court must secure presence of the accused if he does not appear despite service of summons. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/uDR1b4mRA4vZklQQt1YFB5Y0M
61. Dissolution of Company under the IBC will not exonerate liability of directors under Section 138 of the NI Act when proceedings under the NI Act had already commenced with the Magistrate taking cognizance. Supreme Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/Z8h0kabHgtepoprFNihL9kh08
62. Negotiable Instruments Act. When accused is convicted and in appeal deposits 20% of the cheque amount as per the Court direction, the complainant is entitled for release of the amount in his favour. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/kU5iQE7c4gHiOm0XHAFjVSB53
63. Negotiable Instruments. If the payee or holder of the cheque made alteration with the consent of drawer on cheque, such alteration cannot be a ground to resist right of payee or holder thereof. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/kH1vqCHqMdMAlj6SfSaNprNaX
64. Cheque bounce cases. Trial Courts shall verify papers before taking cognizance and provide opportunity to complainant to rectify the mistakes due to inadvertence, ignorance or negligence. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/8a9HdPQTAWkvLN63ceWybFpaZ
65. Cheque Bounce Cases. When the complaint does not disclose the date of service of statutory notice, Court can rely on the date of reply notice to consider limitation aspect. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/HnBAK1EQBbVLlqGbQVLAHdLjX
66. Complaint under Section 138 NI Act cannot be dismissed for default for a single non-appearance of the complainant especially when the accused failed to deposit the interim amount. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/lZFTmDEwQWygGF6wyqHoeUkb2
67. Cheque Bounce cases. Moratorium contained in Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code applies only to Corporate Debtors. Directors are liable under Chapter XVII of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/D5BdzfNtpM2bRwkavFCeKoy3v
68. Cheque bounce case. An independent non-executive director, who is not aware of day-to-day affairs of the company, cannot be held liable under the N.I. Act. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/jXZVPuPEgT17syyhIYnT5Yq4S
69. Negotiable Instruments Act. When the cheque issued by partnership firm is dishonoured, criminal proceeding under Section 138 without impleading the firm is not maintainable. Kerala High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/ZAZa5XyfSOSg7CMzfplt5h7Xy
70. Cheque Dishonour. When the signatory to the cheque was a sole proprietor of a firm, on his death, the liability would not move upon the legal heirs of such sole proprietor. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/QEg0oSO3J2yqpQzf6cblQNwWi
71. Cheque dishonour. Cheque issued by Secretary on behalf of Trust. Complaint is not maintainable without making the Trust a party to the proceedings. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/9jnNNK0bti8807EqiNPE011PW
72. Proceeding under Section 138 NI Act before a particular Court when the transaction having happened in a different place is not maintainable. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/J8poU3HVoXkpielYP8lRs9lHc
73. Dishonour of cheque issued towards time-barred debt/transaction cannot attract the provisions of Section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/LkQPfegqazddmbDA6OlacVNQl
74. Negotiable Instruments Act. A cheque cannot be considered as time barred when it was issued within the time stipulated for repayment. Supreme Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/g2y7GMDLTX6NRaSookSOWgK4K
75. NI Act. Only that person who, at the time the offence was committed, was in charge of and was responsible for conduct of business of company, as well as the company alone be guilty of the offence. Supreme Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/VSBfs1DOKsCoBVClYUwzSnyHE
76. NI Act. Merely because somebody is managing affairs of the company he would not become in charge of the conduct of the business of the company or the person responsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the company. Supreme Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/ZN8M4sWeieRG82Ab3KvI4qcJg
77. Negotiable Instruments Act. Death of the drawer of the cheque cannot and will not efface the offence when the cheque is issued on behalf of the Company. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/vDBsVBtOmitXCl0Uxjp7TAAs3
78. Cheque dishonour. Accused issuing signed blank cheque gives prima facie authority to the holder thereof to fill the details. Such act on the part of the holder does not amount to material alteration of the cheque. Karnataka High Court.
https://www.dakshalegal.com/judgements/actionView/EIh7IXtXRFEjUF9O2IuT55VQW
Daksha Legal 
Thank you very much, for your post, this will help us
LikeLike