https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=414672 In a Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act prosecution, the complainant had to prove the foundational facts that the cheque was issued towards a legally enforceable debt or liability. The statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 were rebuttable, and the accused could displace them by showing a probable defence on a preponderance of probability. Because the complainant produced no supporting documentary material, such as loan sanction papers, bank statements, or proof of disbursement, the alleged debt remained unsubstantiated. The defence created doubt about the existence of liability, and the acquittal was therefore found justified with no illegality or perversity. en-us Fri, 29 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 15 Nov 2021 09:06:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=414672 In a Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act prosecution, the complainant had to prove the foundational facts that the cheque was issued towards a legally enforceable debt or liability. The statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 were rebuttable, and the accused could displace them by showing a probable defence on a preponderance of probability. Because the complainant produced no supporting documentary material, such as loan sanction papers, bank statements, or proof of disbursement, the alleged debt remained unsubstantiated. The defence created doubt about the existence of liability, and the acquittal was therefore found justified with no illegality or perversity. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 29 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=414672