The accused successfully rebutted the mandatory presumption u/s 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act by raising a probable defence and bringing in suspicious circumstances regarding the consideration of the cheque. The complainant failed to remove such suspicion by tendering a satisfactory explanation. The HC upheld the accused's acquittal by the trial court, affirming the presumption of innocence, as the complainant failed to prove the consideration as a matter of fact after the onus shifted.
The accused successfully rebutted the mandatory presumption u/s 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act by raising a probable defence and bringing in suspicious circumstances regarding the consideration of the cheque. The complainant failed to remove such suspicion by tendering a satisfactory explanation. The HC upheld the accused's acquittal by the trial court, affirming the presumption of innocence, as the complainant failed to prove the consideration as a matter of fact after the onus shifted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
