Defence which may not be allowed in any prosecution under section 138
Full Text
Defence which may not be allowed in any prosecution under section 138.—It shall not be a defence in a prosecution for an offence under section 138 that the drawer had no reason to believe when he issued the cheque that the cheque may be dishonoured on presentment for the reasons stated in that section.
Plain English Summary
Bars the drawer from raising the defense of lack of intent or genuine belief that the cheque would be honoured when issued, establishing strict liability.
Key Legal Elements
- Applies exclusively to prosecutions under Section 138
- Eliminates mens rea regarding knowledge of funds at issuance
- Drawer cannot plead bona fide belief that funds would be available
- Strict objective liability upon dishonour and non-payment within 15 days
Practical Note
1. EXCLUSION OF MENS REA (STRICT LIABILITY): • Eliminates the general criminal law defense of absence of guilty mind (mens rea) at the time of cheque issuance. • The drawer cannot argue that they expected money to arrive in their account from a third party. The statute imposes strict objective liability upon failure to pay within 15 days of notice receipt. 2. ADVOCATE TACTICS: • For Complainant: If the accused raises arguments about expected funds or unexpected business losses at the time of issuing the cheque, immediately cite Section 140 to demonstrate that such pleas are statutorily barred. • For Accused: Do not waste time pleading financial distress or honest expectations at issuance; focus exclusively on challenging the existence of the underlying legally enforceable debt or defects in the statutory notice.
हिंदी पाठ
वह प्रतिरक्षा जिसे धारा 138 के अधीन किसी अभियोजन में अनुज्ञात नहीं किया जाएगा।—धारा 138 के अधीन किसी अपराध के लिए अभियोजन में यह कोई प्रतिरक्षा नहीं होगी कि चेक जारी करते समय आहर्ता के पास यह विश्वास करने का कोई कारण नहीं था कि उस धारा में कथित कारणों से चेक उपस्थापन पर अनादृत हो सकता है।