Statutory presumptions in cheque dishonour cases prevail on admitted signature unless the accused rebuts liability with probable evidence.

Admitted issuance of the cheque and the drawer's signature triggered the statutory presumptions of consideration and liability under the Negotiable Instruments Act, and the accused failed to rebut them with probable evidence. The court noted that there was no effective material to support the plea that the cheque was a blank instrument issued to a third party or that no debt existed, while the cheque was presented within validity, dishonoured for insufficiency of funds, and the demand notice was issued in time. The trial court's insistence that the complainant independently prove the source of funds despite these presumptions was therefore erroneous, and the offence under Section 138 stood established.

---

---

Issues: Whether the presumption under Sections 118A and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 stood rebutted and whether the ingredients of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 were proved so as to warrant reversal of the acquittal.

Analysis: Once issuance of the cheque and the drawer's signature were admitted, the statutory presumptions operated in favour of consideration and discharge of debt or liability. The accused adduced no evidence to show that the cheque was issued as a blank cheque to a third party or that no liability existed, and no effective material was elicited in cross-examination to probabilise that defence. The cheque was presented within validity, dishonoured for insufficiency of funds, notice of demand was issued within time, and receipt of notice was not specifically disputed in trial. The finding of the trial court that the complainant had to independently prove the source of funds despite the statutory presumptions was held to be erroneous.

Conclusion: The presumption was not rebutted, the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 was established, and the acquittal was reversed.

Ratio Decidendi: In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, admitted execution of the cheque attracts the statutory presumptions as to consideration and discharge of liability, and the accused must rebut them by probable evidence, failing which the complainant is not required to independently prove the debt beyond the statutory presumption.

---