Section 138 cheque prosecution turns on rebuttal of presumption where contemporaneous notices support a probable defence.

In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the note explains that the accused can rebut the Section 139 presumption by raising a probable defence from surrounding circumstances. Here, the contemporaneous notices and reply notice referred to two blank signed cheques already in the complainant's custody and identified the cheque later relied on, which cast doubt on the complainant's version that the cheque was issued on the date asserted. The materials were treated as sufficient to displace the statutory presumption, and the offence was not proved, resulting in acquittal.

---

---

Issues: Whether the accused committed the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and whether the presumption under Section 139 stood rebutted.

Analysis: The cheque transaction was examined against the contemporaneous notices and reply notice. The reply notice specifically referred to two blank signed cheques already in the complainant's custody and identified the cheque number later relied on by the complainant. This created doubt about the complainant's version that the cheque was issued on the later date asserted in the complaint. Even without reliance on the civil plaint, the surrounding materials were sufficient to show that the accused had raised a probable defence and displaced the statutory presumption.

Conclusion: The offence under Section 138 was not proved and the accused was entitled to acquittal.

---