Rebuttable presumption under Negotiable Instruments law cannot be defeated by silence alone; plausible acquittal stands unless perverse.

Statutory presumptions under the Negotiable Instruments Act are rebuttable, and the accused need only raise a probable defence on a preponderance of probability; personal testimony is not mandatory if the record and surrounding circumstances suffice. An appellate court should not disturb an acquittal merely because another view is possible where the trial court's appreciation of evidence is plausible. On the facts, the trial court's view that the complainant had not credibly proved the transaction was neither perverse nor legally untenable, so the High Court's reversal of acquittal was unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the High Court was justified in reversing an acquittal by treating the accused's failure to step into the witness box as fatal, and in concluding that the presumption under the negotiable instruments law had not been rebutted.

Analysis: The statutory presumptions under Section 118(a) and Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act are rebuttable. The standard required of the accused is only preponderance of probability, and it is not necessary that he must enter the witness box in every case to discharge the burden. The accused may rebut the presumption from the materials brought on record and the circumstances emerging from the evidence. Where the trial court has appreciated the evidence in detail and has taken a plausible view, an appellate court should not reverse an acquittal merely because another view is possible. On the facts, the trial court's assessment that the complainant had not established the transaction with sufficient credibility could not be termed perverse or legally infirm.

Conclusion: The High Court's reversal of acquittal was unsustainable. The accused was not required to testify personally to rebut the presumption, and the trial court's acquittal ought not to have been disturbed.

Ratio Decidendi: A presumption under the Negotiable Instruments Act is rebuttable by a probable defence shown from the record or surrounding circumstances, and an acquittal cannot be reversed unless the trial court's view is perverse or legally untenable.

---