Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
Acquittal of the accused in a cheque dishonor case. The court observed that once the accused raises a probable defense by leading evidence to show no debt/liability existed, the presumptions u/ss 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act disappear. The burden then shifts to the complainant to prove the existence of debt as a matter of fact. In this case, the accused denied issuing the cheque and his signatures. Expert opinion was obtained, and the trial court found the complainant failed to prove the debt/liability's existence, mode of loan advancement, or documentary evidence. The high court found no perversity in the acquittal order, dismissing the petition challenging the acquittal.
Acquittal of the accused in a cheque dishonor case. The court observed that once the accused raises a probable defense by leading evidence to show no debt/liability existed, the presumptions u/ss 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act disappear. The burden then shifts to the complainant to prove the existence of debt as a matter of fact. In this case, the accused denied issuing the cheque and his signatures. Expert opinion was obtained, and the trial court found the complainant failed to prove the debt/liability's existence, mode of loan advancement, or documentary evidence. The high court found no perversity in the acquittal order, dismissing the petition challenging the acquittal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
