Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Dishonour of cheque case - petitioner-accused failed to deposit the amount despite existence of legally enforceable debt/liability. No evidence led to rebut presumption u/ss 118 and 139 of Negotiable Instruments Act. Both lower courts meticulously dealt with all aspects. Factum of cheque issuance and signature undisputed. Defence of borrowing only Rs. 2,00,000/- and returning it not probablized through cogent evidence. Presumption rightly invoked as no probable defence raised despite opportunity. Complainant's evidence not contested regarding Rs. 6,50,000/- borrowed. Supreme Court's ruling in Laxmi Dyechem case applied - accused neither established probable defence nor contested legally enforceable debt/liability, attracting statutory presumption. No illegality in invoking Sections 118 and 139. Well-reasoned judgments by lower courts upheld based on evidence appreciation. Revision petition dismissed, petitioner directed to surrender and serve sentence if not already served.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.