https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415203 In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, proof of cheque issuance, signature, dishonour, and statutory notice attracted the presumptions under Sections 118 and 139, and the accused's unproved claim that the cheque was issued only as security did not rebut them. The concurrent finding of guilt was therefore not shown to suffer from perversity or legal infirmity, and no revision interference was warranted. On sentence, the compensation and fine were treated as just and proper in light of the unpaid cheque amount and lapse of time, with no basis to regard the quantum as excessive. en-us Fri, 12 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 30 Nov 2021 08:30:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415203 In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, proof of cheque issuance, signature, dishonour, and statutory notice attracted the presumptions under Sections 118 and 139, and the accused's unproved claim that the cheque was issued only as security did not rebut them. The concurrent finding of guilt was therefore not shown to suffer from perversity or legal infirmity, and no revision interference was warranted. On sentence, the compensation and fine were treated as just and proper in light of the unpaid cheque amount and lapse of time, with no basis to regard the quantum as excessive. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 12 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415203