Section 138 of the Act. If the complaint is prepared by a layman one cannot expect skilful draftsmanship being reflected therein. It may be inartistically
some time to verify in how many cases involving cheques, in a layman’s language, acquittals have taken place? The number of acquittals have
applications are relates to
lending of loan. The accused is not a layman to sign
simply on the blank application he is well educated
noted is that
admittedly the petitioner/accused is not a ordinary layman, but he is a practicing
Advocate before the High Court. Generally, ignorance
escape from liability if possible.
23. Admittedly, accused is not a layman and he is
Proprietor of Srinivasa Theatre and he knows the bank
transaction
accused nothing but an after
thought, since the accused is not layman, admittedly he
was an employee of an Indusind Bank having knowledge
about consequences
mention it.
It is not believable as the accused is not layman. He is business man
doing the registered chit business and he has worldly
complainant. It is pertinent to note that DW.2 is not
layman ignorant of legal consequences of handing over of
blank signed cheque
guise of their
advocacy, the accused cannot be presume that, she is layman.
She is the responsible lady, though, she back up by her husband ... document at that movement could have been accepted by the
layman, like complainant and it would not be ground to deceit any,
as projected
stamp papers
and the accused is B.com graduate but not a layman, he
24
C.C.No.58004/2018
claims to have not taken
