https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375035 In a Section 138 NI Act prosecution, the complainant must prove a legally enforceable debt or liability; here, the evidence did not satisfactorily establish the alleged employment arrangement, loan disbursal at the respondent's instance, recovery from borrowers, or any credible basis for the claimed escalation of liability, so the foundational debt was not proved. The loan agreement was also found unreliable because the stamp paper predated the alleged execution and the respondent's consent was obtained by misrepresentation, rendering the agreement void under Section 19 of the Contract Act. As the trial court's appreciation of evidence was not perverse, no ground existed to interfere with the acquittal. en-us Wed, 06 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 14 Feb 2019 06:17:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375035 In a Section 138 NI Act prosecution, the complainant must prove a legally enforceable debt or liability; here, the evidence did not satisfactorily establish the alleged employment arrangement, loan disbursal at the respondent's instance, recovery from borrowers, or any credible basis for the claimed escalation of liability, so the foundational debt was not proved. The loan agreement was also found unreliable because the stamp paper predated the alleged execution and the respondent's consent was obtained by misrepresentation, rendering the agreement void under Section 19 of the Contract Act. As the trial court's appreciation of evidence was not perverse, no ground existed to interfere with the acquittal. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 06 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375035