https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273724 The respondent was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act due to the Trial Court overturning the acquittal. The court found that the respondent's defense that the cheques were issued as security for a loan not given lacked substantiating evidence. The respondent's failure to provide proof to counter the complainant's claims and the Trial Court's reliance on insufficient defenses led to the conviction. The case is scheduled for sentencing at a later date. en-us Tue, 21 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Aug 2023 15:34:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273724 The respondent was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act due to the Trial Court overturning the acquittal. The court found that the respondent's defense that the cheques were issued as security for a loan not given lacked substantiating evidence. The respondent's failure to provide proof to counter the complainant's claims and the Trial Court's reliance on insufficient defenses led to the conviction. The case is scheduled for sentencing at a later date. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 21 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273724