https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=414014 Once issuance of the cheque is proved in a cheque dishonour prosecution, the presumption under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 operates in favour of the complainant and extends to the existence of a legally enforceable debt or liability. That presumption is rebuttable, but the accused must rebut it by evidence; a statement under Section 313 CrPC is not substantive evidence and cannot by itself displace the presumption. The analysis states that, where the accused led no defence evidence and the cheque, dishonour, and statutory notice were proved, the trial court erred in insisting on independent proof of loan details and repayment particulars. The acquittal was therefore considered unsustainable. en-us Fri, 08 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 26 Oct 2021 17:06:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=414014 Once issuance of the cheque is proved in a cheque dishonour prosecution, the presumption under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 operates in favour of the complainant and extends to the existence of a legally enforceable debt or liability. That presumption is rebuttable, but the accused must rebut it by evidence; a statement under Section 313 CrPC is not substantive evidence and cannot by itself displace the presumption. The analysis states that, where the accused led no defence evidence and the cheque, dishonour, and statutory notice were proved, the trial court erred in insisting on independent proof of loan details and repayment particulars. The acquittal was therefore considered unsustainable. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 08 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=414014