https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303483 Leave to appeal against acquittal in a Section 138 NI Act complaint was declined because the complainant failed to prove actual payment of the alleged loan, the source of funds, and the date of transaction with certainty. The explanation that the money came from the complainant's father was unsupported because he was not examined. The trial court's judgment was detailed and reasoned, and the acquittal was not shown to be perverse or contrary to the record. In an appeal against acquittal, interference is justified only where guilt is irresistible; a merely possible alternative view does not warrant reversal. en-us Tue, 18 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 26 Jul 2022 20:33:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303483 Leave to appeal against acquittal in a Section 138 NI Act complaint was declined because the complainant failed to prove actual payment of the alleged loan, the source of funds, and the date of transaction with certainty. The explanation that the money came from the complainant's father was unsupported because he was not examined. The trial court's judgment was detailed and reasoned, and the acquittal was not shown to be perverse or contrary to the record. In an appeal against acquittal, interference is justified only where guilt is irresistible; a merely possible alternative view does not warrant reversal. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 18 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303483