Under the provisions of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, one of the essential requirements for a cheque bounce case is that the cheque should have been issued for payment of money for the discharge, in whole or in part, of any debt or other liability. Moreover, the Explanation to Section 138 clarifies that “debt or other liability” means a legally enforceable debt or other liability.
In your situation, from the limited facts that you have mentioned, it appears that the cheque was given as an advance for the services to be rendered by your advocate. The services were yet to be rendered by the advocate. Therefore, in such situation, I think this cheque bounce may not be an offence under Section 138 of the Act. However, please remember that nobody can prevent the opposite party from filing the case in the court and taking a chance; and, moreover, there is a legal presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act that it shall be presumed that the cheque was given for the discharge, in whole or in part, of any debt or other liability, unless the contrary is proved. Therefore, if such case is filed against you, then you’ll have to prove that it was given only as an advance and not for any actual services rendered and that therefore it was not for the discharge, in whole or in part, of any debt or other liability.
Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.
.