https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398474 Revisional interference under Sections 397 and 401 CrPC is limited to illegality, perversity or impropriety and is not a second appeal for reappreciation of evidence. Applying that standard, the court noted that the cheque transaction, dishonour for insufficiency of funds, statutory notice, and bank materials supported the complainant's case. The accused admitted the cheque and signature but failed to prove that it was only a blank security cheque misused by the complainant or to rebut the presumptions under Sections 118(a) and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The concurrent conviction under Section 138 was therefore left undisturbed. en-us Wed, 29 Jul 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 17 Sep 2020 14:43:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398474 Revisional interference under Sections 397 and 401 CrPC is limited to illegality, perversity or impropriety and is not a second appeal for reappreciation of evidence. Applying that standard, the court noted that the cheque transaction, dishonour for insufficiency of funds, statutory notice, and bank materials supported the complainant's case. The accused admitted the cheque and signature but failed to prove that it was only a blank security cheque misused by the complainant or to rebut the presumptions under Sections 118(a) and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The concurrent conviction under Section 138 was therefore left undisturbed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 29 Jul 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398474