138 check return
jignesh
(Querist) 13 September 2013
This query is : Resolved
Hello sir I need an advise on a 138 case that was filled against me in gujarat. Sir court found us guilty and gave order for 1 year in simple prison. Sir my problem is that the check is given by my partner for seacurity on purchase against s land and it was returned but im not the account holder of the check Iits my partners check and also the chevk was from his company and the company has not been accused so can I help me with by giving me an advice thanks.
I'm in not any way related with the company nor the check so is it right to hold me guilty.
V R SHROFF
(Expert) 14 September 2013
Go for Sessions Appeal
Advocate Bhartesh goyal
(Expert) 14 September 2013
If questioned cheque does not bear your signature nor the same is from your account than you can not be held guilty of cheque bounce.challenge the decision in Session Court.
Guest
(Expert) 14 September 2013
First of all, you have not mentioned what reason has been quoted by the judge in his judgment for holding you responsible in sec.138 case?
Secondly, you have not made any mention whether the cheque was signed by you or your partner? If I am not wrong in my apprehension, the cheque would have been given under your signature.
Thirdly, if not signed by you, nor was issued from your account, what your advocate had been doing to defend you?
Please note, if you don't give the background of the case appropriately, you may not be able to get right solution to your problem. Rather, due to this mistake of yours own you may later on blame the experts for misleading you.
jignesh
(Querist) 14 September 2013
Thanks I have made an appeal and also the arguments have been done the final order is next week.
jignesh
(Querist) 14 September 2013
Mr dhingra sir, the check has not been sighned by me and its a company check of my partner and im not any way related to the company. The issue was we had purchased a land and the check was given as security. Also we have presented vouchers sighned by the farmers sons who were handling in behalf of her mother. The judge points in the judgement that we did not respond to the notice on time and also holds me guilty because I was inbolved in the purchase of the land. Sir also in judgement im a power of attorney holder. So is it right to hokd me guilty on 138.
Thanks for responding.
Guest
(Expert) 14 September 2013
Mr. Jignesh,
So, naturally, purchase of land by you along with your partner, holding a power of attorney, have become the vital links in your involvement in acquisition of land by fraudulent means by giving a cheque of an unconcerned company, which might not have been shown having any link with the transaction.
Incidently, you have not replied my question about the role of your advocate in defending your case.
However, unless any document pertaining to transaction of land indicates the cheque to be a security cheque, that cannot be treated as a security cheque. Clauses of agreement are also crucially relevant.
So, it would be better for you to consult some local expert for advice by showing him all the documents pertaining to the land transaction.
V R SHROFF
(Expert) 14 September 2013
"appeal and also the arguments have been done"
SO IS'T IT TOO LATE NOW?? OR U WANT TO PREPARE FOR SC???
At the end, Now stated u signed the cheque!!!
jignesh
(Querist) 14 September 2013
Sir our lawyer has argued that im not the account holder nor im involved with the company the check has been given. He has put a judgement on aneeta hada. There ar 2 person found guilty 1 is my partner and other one is me holding power of attorney of my uncle. So our lawyer also argued that im not in anyway connected with the check or the account. So sir kindly tell me what u thinj thanks.
Guest
(Expert) 14 September 2013
As already advised by Shri Shroof, it is too late, when even your appeal case in in the final stage or arguments. Now, wait for the final order.
DEFENSE ADVOCATE.-firmaction@g
(Expert) 14 September 2013
1) Anil hada case of APEX COURT will not benefit you.
2) However if the pleadings in the complaint are available than still at this stage some relief is possible.
3) Supreme court in this week has given an imp finding regarding scope of POA further modifying 2005 BHOJWANI case.
However it benefits you can be judged only after going thrugh all the case.
Dr J C Vashista
(Expert) 15 September 2013
Appeal against the order/judgement in sessions court, as very well advised by experts.
