https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393844 Admission of issuance of the cheque attracted the statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in favour of the complainant, and the accused failed to rebut them with reliable oral or documentary evidence. The defence that the cheque was only a security cheque, and that a contemporaneous document and transfer of the lorry supported that version, was rejected as unsubstantiated and treated as an afterthought; there was also no reply notice or other material to displace the presumption. Repeated presentation of the cheque within its validity period did not negate liability. The concurrent conviction and sentence under Section 138 were upheld and the revision was dismissed. en-us Wed, 26 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 24 Mar 2020 10:50:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393844 Admission of issuance of the cheque attracted the statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in favour of the complainant, and the accused failed to rebut them with reliable oral or documentary evidence. The defence that the cheque was only a security cheque, and that a contemporaneous document and transfer of the lorry supported that version, was rejected as unsubstantiated and treated as an afterthought; there was also no reply notice or other material to displace the presumption. Repeated presentation of the cheque within its validity period did not negate liability. The concurrent conviction and sentence under Section 138 were upheld and the revision was dismissed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 26 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393844