633+ Lawyers are online 
How to respond to notice from company
09-Jun-2023 (In Criminal Law)
Recently, I have got a job offer from one startup company and I have signed the agreement(Not a legal agreement). As a part of security collaterals, they took 20k cheque from me at that time. All this was done because they have given no time to think and made me to do the things hurry. Later, I informed them that i couldn't join due to some health issues. After various discussions, CEO called and threatened me regarding joining and he said that he will use his full powers to ruin since i breached the commitment. However, I took that as a lyt and stopped payment of cheque with a reason mentioning that "I lost my cheque book". Now, I received a legal notice from that stating that i need to pay 20k with in 15 days of receiving this notice. Otherwise, they would take a action against me towards Section 138 of NI. So please can you suggest me what to do now? Do i need to take this as lyt or do i need to pay?
Hello,
The offence of dishonor of a cheque is made out only if the cheque had been issued for the discharge of any debt or other liability. If the cheque had been issued as a “security”, and if such cheque bounces, no offence is made out under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. However, the burden lies on the accused to prove that such cheque was given only as a security and not for discharge of a debt or other liability. However, as held by the Supreme Court in the aforesaid case of Vijay v. Laxman, (2013) 3 SCC 86, the standard of proof required from the accused for rebutting any such presumption is not as high as that required of the prosecution. So long as the accused can make his version reasonably probable, the burden of rebutting the presumption would stand discharged. Therefore, while no offence is made out if the cheque that is dishonored was given only as a security, the court shall presume that it was given for the discharge of any debt or other liability, and subsequently it will be for the accused to prove that the cheque was not given for the discharge of any debt or other liability but it was given only as a security. Once the accused is able to prove it, he shall be entitled to acquittal from the offence of dishonor of cheque. Therefore, if you have any evidence to show that you issued the cheque only for security, then send a strong reply notice to the employer through an advocate. However, if the employer still files cheque bounce case, feel free to contact me so that i can help you in defending the case.
The offence of dishonor of a cheque is made out only if the cheque had been issued for the discharge of any debt or other liability. If the cheque had been issued as a “security”, and if such cheque bounces, no offence is made out under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. However, the burden lies on the accused to prove that such cheque was given only as a security and not for discharge of a debt or other liability. However, as held by the Supreme Court in the aforesaid case of Vijay v. Laxman, (2013) 3 SCC 86, the standard of proof required from the accused for rebutting any such presumption is not as high as that required of the prosecution. So long as the accused can make his version reasonably probable, the burden of rebutting the presumption would stand discharged. Therefore, while no offence is made out if the cheque that is dishonored was given only as a security, the court shall presume that it was given for the discharge of any debt or other liability, and subsequently it will be for the accused to prove that the cheque was not given for the discharge of any debt or other liability but it was given only as a security. Once the accused is able to prove it, he shall be entitled to acquittal from the offence of dishonor of cheque. Therefore, if you have any evidence to show that you issued the cheque only for security, then send a strong reply notice to the employer through an advocate. However, if the employer still files cheque bounce case, feel free to contact me so that i can help you in defending the case.
Helpful?
18+
18+
Adv. B. Srikiran
Hyderabad | 500+ Answers
CONTACT NOW
Disclaimer: The above query and its response is NOT a legal opinion in any way whatsoever as this is based on the information shared by the person posting the query at lawrato.com and has been responded by one of the Divorce Lawyers at lawrato.com to address the specific facts and details.
Connect with top Criminal lawyers for your specific legal issue
No Comments! Be the first one to comment.
"lawrato.com has handpicked some of the best Legal Experts in the country to help you get practical Legal Advice & help."
