https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408324 In a prosecution under the Negotiable Instruments Act, the statutory presumption under Sections 118(a) and 139 arose once the cheque and signature were admitted. The accused rebutted that presumption by raising a probable defence on a preponderance of probabilities, including denial of the loan transaction, challenge to the cheque's source, and material questioning the complainant's financial capacity. Bank records and surrounding circumstances supported the defence that no legally enforceable debt existed. After rebuttal, the burden shifted back to the complainant, who failed to prove the alleged loan by oral or documentary evidence, so the conviction under Section 138 could not be sustained. en-us Thu, 11 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Jun 2021 08:37:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408324 In a prosecution under the Negotiable Instruments Act, the statutory presumption under Sections 118(a) and 139 arose once the cheque and signature were admitted. The accused rebutted that presumption by raising a probable defence on a preponderance of probabilities, including denial of the loan transaction, challenge to the cheque's source, and material questioning the complainant's financial capacity. Bank records and surrounding circumstances supported the defence that no legally enforceable debt existed. After rebuttal, the burden shifted back to the complainant, who failed to prove the alleged loan by oral or documentary evidence, so the conviction under Section 138 could not be sustained. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 11 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408324