https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415508 In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 remained unrebutted because the applicants led no credible evidence of coercion, forgery, or absence of legally enforceable liability; the conviction was therefore upheld. The territorial-jurisdiction objection was also rejected, as it was not raised before the Magistrate and the existing complaint forum was sustained. No procedural infirmity arose from the alleged denial of oral hearing before the Sessions Court, since the record showed counsel had been heard. Finding no perversity or legal error in the concurrent findings, the revisional court declined interference and left the conviction and sentence intact. en-us Thu, 25 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Dec 2021 08:55:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415508 In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 remained unrebutted because the applicants led no credible evidence of coercion, forgery, or absence of legally enforceable liability; the conviction was therefore upheld. The territorial-jurisdiction objection was also rejected, as it was not raised before the Magistrate and the existing complaint forum was sustained. No procedural infirmity arose from the alleged denial of oral hearing before the Sessions Court, since the record showed counsel had been heard. Finding no perversity or legal error in the concurrent findings, the revisional court declined interference and left the conviction and sentence intact. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 25 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415508