- within Litigation and Mediation & Arbitration topic(s)
- in India
- with readers working within the Law Firm industries
- within Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration, Environment and Criminal Law topic(s)
The Supreme Court through its judgement dated 07.04.2026 in Renuka v. the State of Maharashtra & Anr.1 affirmed that where the basic ingredients of an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (“NI Act”) are satisfied, the complaint cannot be dismissed at the pre-trial stage on the ground that the cheque was not issued towards a legally enforceable debt.
The Court held that once the statutory presumption under Section 139 of the NI Act is attracted, the question whether the cheque was issued in discharge of a legally enforceable debt or liability is a matter of trial and accordingly any conclusion to the contrary to this would amount to disregarding the statutory presumption.
The Court emphasised that at the stage of issuance of process, it only required to examine whether the cheque was issued, presented, dishonoured, followed by issuance of a notice and filing of complaint within the prescribed period. Further, it observed that if the drawer does not dispute the issuance of cheque and the signatures on dishonoured cheque, the presumption under Section 139 comes into operation.
The Court affirmed that the presumption under Section 139 cannot be dislodged in a summary manner at the pre-trial stage merely on the contention that the cheque was not issued towards a legally enforceable debt and that dismissing the complaint at the threshold, without any material to rebut the presumption, is unjustified and results in the presumption being washed away even prior to commencement of the trial.
Footnote
1. SLP (CRL.) NO.7829 of 2023.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
