https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308558 Once cheque issuance and dishonour were proved by oral and bank evidence, 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 with credible material. Bare denial, an unsubstantiated plea of theft or misuse, and failure to produce the alleged police complaint were insufficient to displace those presumptions. Non-production of the complainant's income-tax return was not treated as decisive where the transaction and liability were otherwise established. The acquittal was set aside and conviction under Section 138 followed. en-us Wed, 03 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 04 Jul 2023 16:49:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308558 Once cheque issuance and dishonour were proved by oral and bank evidence, 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 with credible material. Bare denial, an unsubstantiated plea of theft or misuse, and failure to produce the alleged police complaint were insufficient to displace those presumptions. Non-production of the complainant's income-tax return was not treated as decisive where the transaction and liability were otherwise established. The acquittal was set aside and conviction under Section 138 followed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 03 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308558