Cheque dishonour presumptions were rebutted on unchallenged defence evidence, so leave to appeal against acquittal was refused.

In a cheque dishonour prosecution, leave to appeal against acquittal was declined because the accused effectively rebutted the statutory presumptions under negotiable instruments law. Her evidence remained unchallenged as the complainant did not cross-examine her, and the record indicated that the earlier monetary transaction had been repaid and that the cheque was not proved to have been issued towards a subsisting liability. On a preponderance of probability, the accused discharged the burden of rebuttal, so the acquittal was treated as based on sound appreciation of evidence and no interference was warranted.

---

---

Issues: Whether leave to appeal against acquittal in a cheque dishonour prosecution should be granted where the complainant failed to effectively challenge the accused's defence and the accused rebutted the statutory presumptions.

Analysis: The accused entered the witness box and her deposition remained unchallenged because the complainant did not cross-examine her. The evidence on record indicated that the earlier monetary transaction had been repaid and that the cheque in question was not proved to have been issued towards a subsisting liability. The statutory presumptions arising under the negotiable instruments law were treated as rebuttable, and the accused discharged that burden on the standard of preponderance of probability by leading defence evidence. In these circumstances, the order of acquittal was found to rest on sound appreciation of evidence and no ground was made out to interfere.

Conclusion: Leave to appeal was rightly refused and the acquittal was sustained.

---