https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442783 Statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act were held to operate on the basis of the complainant's evidence, surrounding circumstances and documentary record, and the accused failed to rebut them on a preponderance of probabilities. Revisional jurisdiction under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was treated as supervisory, not appellate, so reappreciation of evidence was impermissible absent perversity, illegality or gross miscarriage of justice. The concurrent conviction under Section 138 was therefore sustained, while the sentence was separately considered and reduced to secure payment of the cheque amount. en-us Mon, 21 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 11 Sep 2023 08:58:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442783 Statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act were held to operate on the basis of the complainant's evidence, surrounding circumstances and documentary record, and the accused failed to rebut them on a preponderance of probabilities. Revisional jurisdiction under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was treated as supervisory, not appellate, so reappreciation of evidence was impermissible absent perversity, illegality or gross miscarriage of justice. The concurrent conviction under Section 138 was therefore sustained, while the sentence was separately considered and reduced to secure payment of the cheque amount. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 21 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442783