Section 138 cheque dishonour proof requires enforceable debt and lender's financial capacity; acquittal upheld.

In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the complainant must establish the foundational facts, including that the cheque was issued towards a legally enforceable debt or liability and that he had the financial capacity to advance the alleged loan. The court found the complainant's account of the source and mode of payment inconsistent and held that he failed to satisfactorily prove means to lend the amount claimed. The record also did not satisfactorily establish that the cheque was drawn and issued in discharge of an enforceable liability. The complaint therefore failed to prove the ingredients of the offence, and the acquittal was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the complainant proved, for the purpose of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, that the cheque was issued in discharge of a legally enforceable debt or liability and that he had the financial capacity to advance the alleged loan.

Analysis: The complainant's version regarding the source and mode of payment was found to be inconsistent, and he failed to satisfactorily establish that he had the means to advance the amount claimed. The record also did not satisfactorily prove that the cheque was drawn and issued towards an enforceable liability. In a prosecution under Section 138, the complainant must first establish the foundational facts necessary to bring the case within the statutory offence.

Conclusion: The complainant failed to prove the ingredients of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, and the acquittal was upheld.

---