https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381672 In cheque dishonour proceedings, the statutory presumptions under Sections 118(a) and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act are rebuttable, but the accused must raise a probable defence on a preponderance of probabilities. Mere denial is insufficient, and the presumptions may be displaced only by credible evidence or circumstances showing that the cheque was not issued for a legally enforceable debt or liability. A bare statement under Section 313 CrPC, without the accused entering the witness box or leading defence evidence, cannot by itself be treated as sufficient rebuttal. On that basis, the acquittal could not stand and the matter required reconsideration with the presumptions properly applied. 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 In cheque dishonour proceedings, the statutory presumptions under Sections 118(a) and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act are rebuttable, but the accused must raise a probable defence on a preponderance of probabilities. Mere denial is insufficient, and the presumptions may be displaced only by credible evidence or circumstances showing that the cheque was not issued for a legally enforceable debt or liability. A bare statement under Section 313 CrPC, without the accused entering the witness box or leading defence evidence, cannot by itself be treated as sufficient rebuttal. On that basis, the acquittal could not stand and the matter required reconsideration with the presumptions properly applied. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 27 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381672