Pages

Sep 12, 2010

K N Beena Vs Muniyappan and Anr 2001 CrLJ 4745

Hon'ble Supreme Court of India observed, "In this case admittedly the Ist respondent has led no evidence except some formal evidence. The High Court appears to have proceeded on the basis that the denials/averments in his reply dated 21.5.1993 were sufficient to shift the burden of proof on to the appellant complainant to prove that the cheque was issued for a debt or liability. This is an entirely erroneous approach. The Ist respondent had to prove in the trial, by leading cogent evidence, that there was no debt or liability.”

No comments:

Post a Comment