Supreme Court Restores NI Act Conviction, Warns High Courts Against Exceeding Revisional Jurisdiction

Case Snapshot

Case Name: Kuntegowda v. Thurubaiah

Citation: 2026 INSC 790

Bench: Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan

Date of Judgment: August 4, 2026

Area of Law: Negotiable Instruments Act, Criminal Revision, Presumptions

The Judgment in One Line

High Court erred in revisional jurisdiction by re-appreciating evidence and substituting its own findings for concurrent convictions under Section 138 NI Act.

Why This Judgment Matters

This judgment is a significant reminder of the limited scope of revisional jurisdiction under Section 397 CrPC (now Section 438 BNSS). The Supreme Court restored concurrent convictions under Section 138 of the NI Act, holding that the High Court exceeded its revisional powers by re-appreciating evidence and substituting its own conclusions. The judgment reinforces that once the statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 of the NI Act are triggered, the accused bears a heavy burden to rebut them with cogent evidence. A bare denial or claim of financial incapacity of the complainant is insufficient to dislodge the presumptions. The judgment also clarifies that revisional courts cannot act as appellate courts.

Background

The complainant extended a hand loan of ₹4,50,000 to the accused in December 2010 for purchasing a house site. The accused issued a cheque dated March 20, 2013, which was dishonoured due to insufficient funds. After issuing a legal notice and receiving no payment, the complainant fi

... Upgrade to a Premium Plan to view the full judgment.