https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381672 The High Court set aside the trial court's acquittal of the respondent under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, emphasizing the need to consider the statutory presumptions under Sections 118(a) and 139. The court clarified that the standard of proof for rebutting these presumptions is a "preponderance of probability," not "beyond reasonable doubt." The respondent's failure to provide sufficient evidence to rebut the presumptions led to the High Court directing a re-hearing of the case, ensuring proper application of legal standards. en-us Mon, 27 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 17 Jun 2019 07:12:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381672 The High Court set aside the trial court's acquittal of the respondent under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, emphasizing the need to consider the statutory presumptions under Sections 118(a) and 139. The court clarified that the standard of proof for rebutting these presumptions is a "preponderance of probability," not "beyond reasonable doubt." The respondent's failure to provide sufficient evidence to rebut the presumptions led to the High Court directing a re-hearing of the case, ensuring proper application of legal standards. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 27 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381672