Concessional penalty for search-disclosed unreconciled jewellery applies where substantive disclosure conditions are met despite omission from origina...
The HC dismissed the appeal and upheld the trial court's acquittal of the accused under Section 138 N.I. Act, concluding the complainant failed to prove the offence. The court held the accused successfully rebutted the statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 on the preponderance of probabilities standard; circumstantial materials and DW evidence, including Exhibit D1, undermined PW1's transaction-related testimony and exposed gaps in the complaint and chief affidavit (notably omission of cheque execution/issuance date). Consistent with precedent, where the accused contests the complainant's financial capacity the evidential burden shifts back to the complainant, which here remained unestablished.
The HC dismissed the appeal and upheld the trial court's acquittal of the accused under Section 138 N.I. Act, concluding the complainant failed to prove the offence. The court held the accused successfully rebutted the statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 on the preponderance of probabilities standard; circumstantial materials and DW evidence, including Exhibit D1, undermined PW1's transaction-related testimony and exposed gaps in the complaint and chief affidavit (notably omission of cheque execution/issuance date). Consistent with precedent, where the accused contests the complainant's financial capacity the evidential burden shifts back to the complainant, which here remained unestablished.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
