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.
The HC dismissed a petition challenging acquittal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The accused successfully rebutted statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 by raising probable defence that no debt existed. The complainant failed to produce documentary evidence or witnesses proving advancement of the alleged friendly loan, despite cross-examination highlighting absence of corroborative evidence regarding loan's mode, manner, date, or purpose. Once the accused dislodged the presumption through probable defence, burden shifted to complainant to prove debt's existence as matter of fact. The Court found no perversity in the trial court's acquittal order, noting that acquittal fortifies presumption of innocence and should not be disturbed absent perverse evidence appreciation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.