https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304976 Admitted issuance of the cheque and the drawer's signature triggered the statutory presumptions of consideration and liability under the Negotiable Instruments Act, and the accused failed to rebut them with probable evidence. The court noted that there was no effective material to support the plea that the cheque was a blank instrument issued to a third party or that no debt existed, while the cheque was presented within validity, dishonoured for insufficiency of funds, and the demand notice was issued in time. The trial court's insistence that the complainant independently prove the source of funds despite these presumptions was therefore erroneous, and the offence under Section 138 stood established. en-us Wed, 06 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 09 Nov 2022 10:29:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304976 Admitted issuance of the cheque and the drawer's signature triggered the statutory presumptions of consideration and liability under the Negotiable Instruments Act, and the accused failed to rebut them with probable evidence. The court noted that there was no effective material to support the plea that the cheque was a blank instrument issued to a third party or that no debt existed, while the cheque was presented within validity, dishonoured for insufficiency of funds, and the demand notice was issued in time. The trial court's insistence that the complainant independently prove the source of funds despite these presumptions was therefore erroneous, and the offence under Section 138 stood established. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 06 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304976