Admitted cheque signature triggers statutory presumption of liability; accused must rebut it with credible evidence to avoid conviction.

Where the accused admits the signature on a cheque, the statutory presumptions under the Negotiable Instruments Act arise in favour of the holder, including presumptions of consideration and liability. In such a situation, the accused must rebut those presumptions with credible evidence; mere denial is insufficient. On the facts stated, the accused failed to disprove the promissory note or the assertion that the cheque was issued towards part-payment of an existing debt, and the concurrent findings were found to disclose no illegality or irregularity warranting revisional interference. The conviction and sentence were therefore upheld and the revision was dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether, in a prosecution under the Negotiable Instruments Act, the admitted signature on the cheque and the evidence on record justified the presumption of liability and sustained the conviction in revision.

Analysis: The accused did not dispute the signature on the cheque. Once signature is admitted, the presumption under the Negotiable Instruments Act operates in favour of the holder, including the presumption of consideration and liability. The accused failed to adduce credible evidence to disprove the promissory note or to rebut the presumption that the cheque was issued towards part-payment of an existing debt. The concurrent findings of the courts below were based on oral and documentary evidence and disclosed no illegality or irregularity warranting revisional interference.

Conclusion: The conviction and sentence were upheld and the revision was dismissed against the accused.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the signature on a cheque is admitted, the statutory presumptions under the Negotiable Instruments Act arise in favour of the complainant, and the accused must rebut them by credible evidence to avoid conviction under Section 138.

---