https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=435975 Where the cheque and signature were admitted, the presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act operated in favour of the holder, and the accused had to rebut them on a preponderance of probabilities. The defence that the cheque was issued only as security was not substantiated, while the complainant and bank evidence proved presentation, dishonour for insufficiency of funds, notice, and non-payment. The ingredients of Section 138 were therefore satisfied, and guilt was upheld. Revisional interference under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was unwarranted because no illegality, material irregularity, or miscarriage of justice was shown in the concurrent findings. en-us Thu, 16 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 31 Mar 2023 14:57:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=435975 Where the cheque and signature were admitted, the presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act operated in favour of the holder, and the accused had to rebut them on a preponderance of probabilities. The defence that the cheque was issued only as security was not substantiated, while the complainant and bank evidence proved presentation, dishonour for insufficiency of funds, notice, and non-payment. The ingredients of Section 138 were therefore satisfied, and guilt was upheld. Revisional interference under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was unwarranted because no illegality, material irregularity, or miscarriage of justice was shown in the concurrent findings. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 16 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=435975