https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=374920 Revisional interference with concurrent convictions is confined to cases of perversity, patent illegality, or jurisdictional error, and reappreciation of evidence to reach a different factual view is impermissible. In cheque dishonour prosecutions, Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act creates a rebuttable presumption that the cheque was issued for a legally enforceable debt or liability, and the drawer must rebut it with cogent evidence. A signed blank cheque voluntarily handed over does not by itself defeat the presumption, and a fiduciary or professional relationship alone does not negate liability absent proof of coercion, undue influence, theft, or similar circumstances. en-us Wed, 06 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 Jul 2025 15:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=374920 Revisional interference with concurrent convictions is confined to cases of perversity, patent illegality, or jurisdictional error, and reappreciation of evidence to reach a different factual view is impermissible. In cheque dishonour prosecutions, Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act creates a rebuttable presumption that the cheque was issued for a legally enforceable debt or liability, and the drawer must rebut it with cogent evidence. A signed blank cheque voluntarily handed over does not by itself defeat the presumption, and a fiduciary or professional relationship alone does not negate liability absent proof of coercion, undue influence, theft, or similar circumstances. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 06 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=374920