I am fighting an NI 138 case as accused, convicted by the trial court and now at the arguments stage in sessions court, in reality we did not borrow any money from the complainant but due to lack of proper defense we have lost in the trial court though I myself could find some glaring errors made by the complainant. With some knowledge that I gained from this forum on such cases, I have a case wherein Bank return memo is completely flawed by the complainant. The legal notice mentions a bank different form that of the bank return memo submitted by the complainant. Return memo reads service branch but next to it a different area branch is written in hand writing, The branch code they mentioned does not exist for that branch or any other branch in that city. The MICR code that they mentoned is also of accused bank branch and not the complainants bank MICR. The letter is neither a letter head nor its stamped, but only singed as bank manager. These were unnoitced by my counsel in earlier arguments and now we are in sessions court, as per NI 146 as some senior advocates suggested, the complainant has not proved dishonor of cheque in any other form excpet for the return memo which does not bear a seal and also with the above mentioned flaws.
Secondly, the payment was made to an individual and the cheque dishonored is a current cheque stating Proprietor, in such case how can the authenticity of the person as a proprietor can be proved and can such cheques be accpeted as cheque bounce. what does the law say between amounts lent to an individual but cheque bounce on the proprietor without any relation esablished?
When the case has come to the arguments stage in sessions court, can we file a quash petition citing these errors with the present court or higher court or is it necessary for the sessions court to make a jugment first before we go for a quash petition in the higher court. Does thiese demerits quality for quashing of the case?