https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369113 In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the cheque dishonour and statutory notice were undisputed, but the accused successfully rebutted the presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 by eliciting admissions in cross-examination. The complainant admitted there was no privity of contract with the accused, that the underlying dealings belonged to his brother, and that advancing a large cash amount without any document was improbable. Because the presumptions are rebuttable on a preponderance of probabilities, the burden shifted back to the complainant to prove passing of consideration, which he failed to do. The acquittal was therefore upheld. en-us Fri, 05 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 22 Oct 2018 09:51:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369113 In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the cheque dishonour and statutory notice were undisputed, but the accused successfully rebutted the presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 by eliciting admissions in cross-examination. The complainant admitted there was no privity of contract with the accused, that the underlying dealings belonged to his brother, and that advancing a large cash amount without any document was improbable. Because the presumptions are rebuttable on a preponderance of probabilities, the burden shifted back to the complainant to prove passing of consideration, which he failed to do. The acquittal was therefore upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 05 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369113