Appeal allowed, acquittal set aside, respondent convicted under Section 138 NI Act. Fine imposed.

The appeal was allowed, acquittal set aside, and the respondent convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The respondent was ordered to pay a fine of Rs. 38,000 and 6% interest per annum on the principal amount. The court emphasized that jail detention does not discharge liability and highlighted payment as the sole satisfaction. Failure to pay within fifteen days would accrue further interest.

---

---

Issues:
Acquittal appeal against judgment under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

Analysis:
The appellant alleged that the respondent borrowed Rs. 25,000 and issued a cheque which bounced due to insufficient funds. The trial court acquitted the respondent based on provisions of Money Lenders Act, 1934 and Income Tax Act, 1961, instead of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The appellant argued that evidence proved the debt, issuance of the cheque, and dishonor due to insufficient funds. The respondent claimed that the debt was not proven. The court examined whether the respondent borrowed the amount, issued the cheque, and failed to pay after notice. The appellant's evidence, supported by documents, established the debt and dishonored cheque.

The court referred to Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, which presumes that a cheque is issued for discharge of debt unless proven otherwise. The respondent did not rebut this presumption. The trial court's finding on cash advance and Money Lenders Act was deemed incorrect as the respondent did not deny borrowing the money. The court held that the presumption under Section 139 stands when not rebutted. The trial court's decision was against the weight of evidence and the law. The respondent was convicted under Section 138, with a fine of Rs. 38,000 and 6% interest per annum on the principal amount.

In conclusion, the appeal was allowed, acquittal set aside, and the respondent convicted under Section 138. The respondent was ordered to pay the fine and interest, with non-payment leading to further interest. The court clarified that jail detention does not discharge the liability, emphasizing payment as the only satisfaction. The amount was to be paid within fifteen days, with interest accruing if not paid promptly.

---