Cheque presumptions and limited revisional review govern Section 138 liability where signed blank cheque defences fail.

In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, admitted drawer signature and proof of the transaction trigger the presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 in favour of the complainant. Those presumptions remain rebuttable, but the accused must displace them on a preponderance of probabilities; a signed blank cheque, if voluntarily delivered, does not by itself negate liability. Revisional jurisdiction under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is supervisory and does not permit reappreciation of evidence or substitution of a different view unless the concurrent findings are perverse, unreasonable, or cause miscarriage of justice.

---

---

Issues: Whether the revisional court should interfere with concurrent findings convicting the accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, on the plea that the cheque was issued as a blank security cheque and that the guarantor had no liability.

Analysis: Once the complainant proves the transaction leading to issuance of the cheque and the drawer's signature is admitted, the presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 operate in favour of the complainant. Those presumptions are rebuttable, but the accused must displace them on a preponderance of probabilities. A signed blank cheque, if voluntarily delivered, does not by itself negate liability. The revisional jurisdiction under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is supervisory and does not permit reappreciation of evidence or substitution of a different view unless the concurrent findings are perverse, unreasonable, or result in miscarriage of justice.

Conclusion: The challenge to conviction failed. The plea of blank security cheque and absence of guarantor liability was rejected, and no ground for revisional interference was made out.

Final Conclusion: The concurrent conviction and sentence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 were left undisturbed, with only time granted for payment of compensation and compliance before the trial court.

Ratio Decidendi: In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, once execution of the cheque is proved or admitted, the presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 arise and the accused must rebut them on a preponderance of probabilities; a revisional court will not reappreciate evidence to upset concurrent findings absent perversity or gross illegality.

---