https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310632 In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the complainant must prove that the cheque was actually drawn or executed by the accused. Mere production of the cheque, or proof that a signed blank cheque leaf was issued or handed over, is not enough to establish this essential ingredient. Drawing may be proved by direct, circumstantial, or other admissible evidence, including proof of handwriting and signature under the Evidence Act, but the foundational fact of execution must still be shown to attract liability under Section 138. en-us Thu, 30 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 03 Nov 2023 15:28:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310632 In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the complainant must prove that the cheque was actually drawn or executed by the accused. Mere production of the cheque, or proof that a signed blank cheque leaf was issued or handed over, is not enough to establish this essential ingredient. Drawing may be proved by direct, circumstantial, or other admissible evidence, including proof of handwriting and signature under the Evidence Act, but the foundational fact of execution must still be shown to attract liability under Section 138. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 30 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310632