In a cheque dishonour appeal against acquittal, the court held...

In a cheque dishonour appeal against acquittal, the court held that interference with an acquittal is warranted only if the view is perverse or based on misreading/omission of material evidence, and a plausible view must be respected. Although the accused admitted the cheque signature, the complainant's cross-examination rendered his financial capacity doubtful, displacing the presumption of legally enforceable liability. Further, the loan was alleged to have been advanced in 2014 without specific dates, while the cheque was issued in November 2017; on these pleadings the cheque related to a time-barred debt and did not attract Section 138 NI Act, rendering the complaint not maintainable. Non-compliance with Section 269SS IT Act did not justify adverse inference; the appeal was dismissed - HC

---