https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304877 The court concluded that the cheques were taken as security for future contingent liability, not towards the discharge of any existing debt, thus Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act does not apply. The accused successfully rebutted the presumption of discharge of debt by demonstrating that the cheques were taken as security. Directors A-3 and A-4 were not held liable under Section 138 as they were not signatories and lacked control over the company's daily affairs. The trial court's acquittal order was upheld, and the appeal was dismissed, affirming the judgment of acquittal. en-us Fri, 23 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 02 Nov 2022 14:49:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304877 The court concluded that the cheques were taken as security for future contingent liability, not towards the discharge of any existing debt, thus Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act does not apply. The accused successfully rebutted the presumption of discharge of debt by demonstrating that the cheques were taken as security. Directors A-3 and A-4 were not held liable under Section 138 as they were not signatories and lacked control over the company's daily affairs. The trial court's acquittal order was upheld, and the appeal was dismissed, affirming the judgment of acquittal. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 23 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304877