Statutory presumptions in cheque dishonour cases require credible rebuttal; acquittal was set aside and remanded for fresh evidence.

Admitted signatures on dishonoured cheques attracted the statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, and the accused's explanation that cheque leaves were lost and misused required proof from facts especially within his knowledge. Because the accused did not enter the witness box to explain how the cheques reached the complainant or why stop-payment instructions were issued, and the disputed service of notice also called for fuller evidentiary scrutiny, the acquittal was interfered with. The judgments below were set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh disposal with liberty to both sides to adduce further evidence.

---

---

Issues: Whether the acquittal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 was liable to be set aside and the matter remanded for fresh disposal in view of the admitted signatures on the cheques, the statutory presumptions, and the disputed service of notice.

Analysis: The cheques bore the accused's admitted signatures, attracting the statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The defence that the cheque leaves were lost and later misused was a matter specially within the accused's knowledge, and the accused had not entered the witness box to explain the circumstances under which the cheques came into the complainant's possession or why stop-payment instructions were issued. The Court also noted that service of notice was disputed, but the surrounding material required fuller examination of facts and evidence. In these circumstances, the Court found that the accused's evidence was necessary for a fair adjudication.

Conclusion: The acquittal was interfered with, the judgments of the courts below were set aside, and the matter was remanded to the trial court for fresh disposal after permitting both sides to adduce further evidence.

---