Cheque dishonour presumptions under NI Act upheld as security cheque defence failed in revision.

Cheque dishonour under Section 138 NI Act was upheld where the cheque and signatures were admitted, the loan transaction and default were not denied, and the complainant proved presentation, dishonour, statutory notice and non-payment. The presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 operated in favour of the holder, and the accused failed to rebut them on a preponderance of probabilities. A cheque issued as security can still attract Section 138 when the underlying liability remains unpaid. Revisional jurisdiction was found too narrow for re-appreciation of evidence absent perversity or miscarriage of justice, so conviction and sentence were sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether the conviction for dishonour of cheque under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was liable to be interfered with in revision, and whether the defence of the cheque being a security cheque rebutted the statutory presumptions.

Analysis: The cheque and signatures thereon were not disputed. The accused admitted the loan transaction and default, but led no evidence to probabilise the defence. The complainant proved presentation, dishonour, statutory notice and non-payment, thereby establishing the ingredients of the offence. The presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act operated in favour of the holder of the cheque, and the accused failed to rebut them on a preponderance of probabilities. The Court also noted that a security cheque issued in a financial transaction can attract Section 138 when the liability remains unpaid, and that revisional jurisdiction is narrow and does not permit re-appreciation of evidence absent perversity or miscarriage of justice.

Conclusion: The conviction and sentence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act were upheld, and no interference was warranted in revision.

---