In a prosecution for cheque dishonour due to "funds insufficient," the court held that once the drawer's signature and dishonour are proved, statutory presumptions under ss. 118 and 139 NI Act arise that the cheque was issued for consideration and in discharge of a legally enforceable debt. The accused must rebut this by credible proof making the defence reasonably probable; a merely plausible explanation is inadequate, and no probable defence was established. The complainant's financial capacity need not be proved unless specifically disputed in response to the statutory demand notice, which was not done here. Service of notice was treated as compliant when properly addressed and sent by registered post. The revision was dismissed and the conviction and sentence were upheld - HC
In a prosecution for cheque dishonour due to "funds insufficient," the court held that once the drawer's signature and dishonour are proved, statutory presumptions under ss. 118 and 139 NI Act arise that the cheque was issued for consideration and in discharge of a legally enforceable debt. The accused must rebut this by credible proof making the defence reasonably probable; a merely plausible explanation is inadequate, and no probable defence was established. The complainant's financial capacity need not be proved unless specifically disputed in response to the statutory demand notice, which was not done here. Service of notice was treated as compliant when properly addressed and sent by registered post. The revision was dismissed and the conviction and sentence were upheld - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
