Rebuttable presumptions in cheque dishonour cases: appellate courts will not disturb acquittal where the defence creates reasonable doubt.

In a prosecution under the Negotiable Instruments Act, the court reiterated that the presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 remain rebuttable and that a legally acceptable defence creating doubt can sustain an acquittal. The complainant's case was found by material contradictions, lack of proof of the alleged payment, absence of corroboration for financial capacity, and inconsistencies in the evidence. In an appeal against acquittal, where two views are possible, the view favourable to the accused must prevail. On that basis, the acquittal was upheld and interference was refused.

---

---

Issues: Whether the acquittal in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 called for interference in appeal, in view of the presumption under Sections 118 and 139 and the defence raised by the accused.

Analysis: The complaint was based on an alleged monetary transaction and issuance of a cheque that was dishonoured for insufficiency of funds. The defence disputed the foundational facts and relied on materials showing inconsistencies in the complainant's version, absence of supporting proof for the alleged payment, lack of corroboration of the claimed financial capacity, and contradictions in the evidence. The trial court had found material contradictions and held that the complainant had not proved the case beyond reasonable doubt. In an appeal against acquittal, where two views are possible, the view favourable to the accused is to be adopted. The accused is not required to disprove the prosecution case beyond reasonable doubt, and a legally acceptable defence creating doubt is sufficient to sustain acquittal.

Conclusion: The acquittal was upheld and no interference was warranted.

---