https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161986 In a prosecution for cheque dishonour, the statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act arise once execution of the cheque is admitted or proved, shifting the evidential burden to the accused. The accused may rebut them on a preponderance of probabilities through direct or circumstantial evidence, including material from the complainant's own case; here, the available evidence showed no sale transaction and the complainant produced no supporting books or records, so the presumptions were rebutted and no legally enforceable debt was proved. The text also states that, after reversing an acquittal, the appellate court must impose sentence itself and cannot remit sentencing to the trial court. en-us Tue, 16 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Jul 2025 14:15:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161986 In a prosecution for cheque dishonour, the statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act arise once execution of the cheque is admitted or proved, shifting the evidential burden to the accused. The accused may rebut them on a preponderance of probabilities through direct or circumstantial evidence, including material from the complainant's own case; here, the available evidence showed no sale transaction and the complainant produced no supporting books or records, so the presumptions were rebutted and no legally enforceable debt was proved. The text also states that, after reversing an acquittal, the appellate court must impose sentence itself and cannot remit sentencing to the trial court. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 16 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=161986