Security cheque under Section 138 cannot be disturbed in revision where the acquittal rests on a possible view.

A cheque issued as security, rather than in discharge of an existing liability, may not attract liability under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act where the surrounding facts support that characterisation. On the admitted facts, part payment had been made in cash and further instalments followed, while the notice did not fully reflect the cash payments already made. The trial court's view that the cheque did not represent payment of a subsisting debt was treated as a possible view. In revision against acquittal, interference is unwarranted where two views are possible and the one favourable to the accused has been adopted; the acquittal was therefore upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the acquittal recorded for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 was liable to be interfered with in revision on the ground that the cheque was issued in discharge of liability and the statutory presumption was not rebutted.

Analysis: The cheque was treated as having been issued by way of security and not as payment of an existing liability. The admitted facts showed part payment in cash and subsequent instalments, while the notice did not reflect the full cash payments already made. On these facts, the Court held that the trial court's view that the cheque did not represent a cheque issued in discharge of liability was a possible view. In revision against acquittal, interference is not warranted where two views are possible and the view favourable to the accused has been adopted.

Conclusion: The acquittal was upheld and no revisional interference was made.

---