https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429665 In revision, the HC held that concurrent conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act would not be interfered with where the accused failed to rebut the statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139. Revisional jurisdiction under Sections 397 and 401 CrPC is supervisory and does not permit reappreciation of evidence absent perversity or miscarriage of justice. As the complainant's evidence and account statements established the transaction and cheque execution, a bare plea that the cheque was signed blank was insufficient without defence evidence or a probable rebuttal. The conviction was upheld, but the custodial sentence and default term were reduced while retaining the fine as compensation. en-us Tue, 01 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 02 Nov 2022 13:09:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429665 In revision, the HC held that concurrent conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act would not be interfered with where the accused failed to rebut the statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139. Revisional jurisdiction under Sections 397 and 401 CrPC is supervisory and does not permit reappreciation of evidence absent perversity or miscarriage of justice. As the complainant's evidence and account statements established the transaction and cheque execution, a bare plea that the cheque was signed blank was insufficient without defence evidence or a probable rebuttal. The conviction was upheld, but the custodial sentence and default term were reduced while retaining the fine as compensation. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 01 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429665