Legal notice by email validity

Case law in cheque cases has been very finely tuned by SUPREME COURT , and it is just not a case that a) a cheque  is  bounced or a notice is issued to the accused can be convicted.

Please go through the follwoing another APEX COURT  citation dealing these points in detail and mos specificaly.

M/s. Dalmia Cement
(Bharat) Ltd. v. M/s. Galaxy Traders & Agencies Ltd., AIR 2001 SC, the Supreme Court observed as follows in paragraph 14.“14, It is one thing to say that sending of a notice is one of the ingredients for maintaining the complaint but is another thing to say that dishonour of a cheque by itself constitutes an offence. For the purpose of proving its case that the accused had committed an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act,the ingredients thereof are required to be proved.What would constitute an offence is stated in the main provision.

The proviso appended hereto,however, imposes certain further conditions which are required to be fulfilled before cognizance of the offence can be taken. If the ingredients for constitution of the offence laid down in the provisos (a), (b) and (c) appended to Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act are intended to be applied in favour of the accused, there cannot be any doubt that the receipt of a notice would ultimately give rise to the cause of action for filing a complaint. As it is only on receipt of the notice the accused at his own peril may refuse to pay the amount.

Clauses (b) and (c) of the proviso to Section 138 therefore must be read together. Issuance of notice would not by itself give rise to a cause of action but communication of the notice would.”

Very Well said..

Once the cognizance has been taken and charges framed, it goes out of hands of trial court and this becomes part of defense. The point is can we say for sure in such circumstances (without travelling upto Supreme Court) that the accused is safe.  In my humble opinion no. So this can be one part of the defense which must be agitated, but one should not feel complacent that wow I am free.

This see within sec. 138 connected with NI React is necessary to possibly be functioned within the offender in a couple of weeks connected with intimation connected with dishonour connected with cheque although not any unique data format is usually prescribed by doctors. That's why it might be supplied by means of mail. Per portion 5 of the usb ports REACT will probably be realised seeing that logical evidence of currently being sent in publishing. However requirement of trademark is usually complied having by means of received it brought in digitally, Nevertheless there is absolutely no unique qualification within sec. 138 which the see need to be brought in. SC has recently presented of which whether or not this see isn't going to have trademark on the sender, this desire connected with cheque total is usually presented validly of giving this see on right target in addition to recieved because of the issuer connected with bounced cheque.