Accused you can win cheque bounce case.

POWER OF DEFENSE IS IMMENSE

1) Accused of any cheque bounce case you can win the case if the case is properly handled from day one.

 

2)We are now contesting many big cheque bounce cases  for the accused and those who are nearby can attend and see the defense in action.

 

3) Cheque bounce is a criminal case so every mistake of the complainant goes in favor of the accused. And it is just not possible for the complainant not to make mistakes.

 

3) Govt being owner of Public sector banks is the biggest litiagant in cheque bounce cases and they have realised that it is not possible to make a foolproof law and hence Govt has decided to amend the law and bring it from criminal trial to ARBITRATION.

 

4) However there will be some time lag till the changes in law comes in force , so existing cases will continue as criminal trial.

 

 5) We get very rude and abusive esponse from complainants and their agents on this site and also irresponsible remarks by immature advocates who have never handled any such cases.

 

However we treat it as acceptance of our expertise.

 

6) We win all the cases for accused of cheque bounce and it is always easy sure and simple for the accused to win such cases provided proper efforts are taken for defense from initial stages.WE are there fore always ready to help and assist any accused of cheque bounce case. But please contact with complete details.

 
Reply   
 
advocate.dma@gmail.com

Keep Advertising !!

 

There are few on this forum with funny names, who claim that they can win any cheque bounce case !! WOW !! Very soon these funny names will shift to RAPE Cases as NI act amendment will make their shop more or less customerless, and rape cases are increasing day by day... Then they will say : You can win any rape case if handled properly from day one !!! 

 

In my last few years of association with this forum, I have not seen a single worthwhile suggestion or advise from these funny names, they just babble with their half cooked knowledge like those quakes on road side of every class B cities who claim treatement of every disease.

 

Disclaimer : If they can show a single post where they have given some sage advise or some lawful advise, then I will withdraw above statement.

 
Reply   
 


simple solutions for criminal legal problems -- yourpunch@gmail.com

The cheque law is a draconian law and for simple money transactions criminal procedure has been provided.

 

So it is the duty of  any advocate if any accused comes to him than to help him to come out of the clutches of this unreasonable  law.

 
Reply   
 
advocate.dma@gmail.com

Every presumptive law can be classified in the category of draconian, but then thats how it works. ------------ But openly telling people that every cheque bounce case can be won is kind of dishonesty and insult to our system........ Take for example I buy something against proper bill, give proper receipt and issue a cheque of Rs. 15 Lacs to clear this liability.... this cheque bounces and I contact one funny name and tell him that I will pay 50% of the cheque value as his fee, please save me.......This is not only dishonesty but perpetuating dishonesty...

 

My advise to all those cheque bounce accused, if they feel that they are honest and the holder is misusing the presumption under S.139, then they must fight properly with the help of best available counsels, they will surely come out of this. And my advise to those cheque bounced accused, who have dishonestly allowed the cheque to go dishonor, they should think twice before proceeding further with the trials, there is no escape and there should not be any escape for such people. This is the best possible suggestion I give to my clients and giving on this forum. Please do not attempt the folly of winning the case if cheque has bounced due to your dishonesty, settle it off if you can. After a year or so when the government brings mens rea also in this, then may be some chance for such dishonest people but not now.

 

At the end my sympathy is always with those people who have helplessly got stuck into high EMI loan transactions etc, they want to clear the dues but they cannot due to bad financial conditions or lay offs, such people should not be punished and they can be defended. Ideally this section is not meant for such cases but our over enthusiastic overburdened trial courts are adding salt to injury in such cases.

 
Reply   
 
solve problems in criminal cases. lawproblems@gmail.com

R TRIVEDI you are finding faults with SUPREME COURT, HIGH COURT Judgements and COURTS so if you HAVE any knowledge of court working why you do not work for complainants.

 

Cheque bounce is only civil liability of money so giving it nature of crimnal action  is it self  a great injustice.

 

ACCUSED OF ANY CHEQUE BOUNCE CASE SHOULD BOLDLY FIGHT THE CASE SUCESS WILL BE YOURS AND WE WILL ALSO ASSIST YOU TO ACHIEVE THE SAME,  You have not paid in time is not such big crime that you should be sent to JAIL .CONTACT WTIH COMPLETE DETAILS OF YOUR CASE.

 
Reply   
 
advocate.dma@gmail.com

Laxminarain, First please tell how Supreme Court can take away S.315 CrPC !!

 

 
Reply   
 
solve problems in criminal cases. lawproblems@gmail.com

Conduct some actual court case  in criminal trial.

 
Reply   
 
advocate.dma@gmail.com

Funny names, Funny Faces and Funny claims....  I have a feeling and which is clear from these posts also that all these Funny Names and Funny Faces are operating together.

 

Hon HC/SC has approved the conviction of thousands of cheque bounce accused, still these funny names claim that any cheque bounce accused can win. Except writing you can win, fight boldly (as if it is some wrestling AKHARA), it is civil case, this will not work, that will not work, SC Has closed all the doors, CONTACT US WITH FULL DETAILS....... these are few advises by these funny names, nothing more. These funny names are consistent and disciplined, they just do not write anything other than these 5-10 lines..... not even a single worthwhile post. They know if they right anything beyond  these lines their knowledge will be exposed... a la S.315 CrPC Set Aside Type.

 
Reply   
 
solve problems in criminal cases. lawproblems@gmail.com

It shows your deep frustration and inferiority complex of not having conducted any criminal trial.

 

Pl tell us which court you practice if pactice at all so that we can decide in that court  it self whether you can find faults with SUPREME COURT, HICH COURT JUDGEMENTS  and courts in general. PUBLICLY . Till that time please stop filthy language for others.

 
Reply   
 
advocate.dma@gmail.com

Pl tell, Pl contact, pl send details.... keep advertsing, but please do not mislead accused that  "ALL THE CHEQUE BOUNCE CASES CAN BE WON".

 

Write more than those 5-10 lines and if you all have some idea of proper defense please come forward and state, instead of every time writing, this will not work,  that will not work, fight boldly... Talk like a counsel with valid arguments..... Although I do not criticise SC/HC orders but even to do so  require sound knowledge of law which you people lack.

 

I give you a challenge except Kerala high Court none of the HCs have understood the proper meaning of S.139 (I have not seen any order)

 

1. The presumption under S.139 is given to holder, not to possessor. The word "possessor" is used 3-4 times in NI act and used differently from Holder. The word Holder is defined in NI Act.  A person who possesses the cheque for valid consideration.

2. There is no presumption for the amount, the presumption is only with respect to liability type. Drawer cannot say that he gave the cheque as Gift, for some other liability away from what complainant says, it has to be proved.

3. The amount has to be proved by complainant to get the benefit of presumption.

4. There is no law that mere signature on the cheque is execution of the cheque, and admitting the signature will give the presumption under S.139.

5. There is no direct inapplicability of men rea, that means criminal intent must be there, but this issue has been not discussed in detail barring few side remarks in one or two orders.

 

How many cases you have won on such grounds ? Do not advise your clients not to respond to notice, they must but with care. And also Sachin R Tendulkar is same as  S R Tendulkar, S.315 CrPC cannot be set aside by SC, and that SC Dychem order is very good for accused not bad as you guys have made out.

 

 
Reply   
 

LEAVE A REPLY


    

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  



 

Search Forum:








×

  LAWyersclubindia Menu

web analytics