https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445677 In a cheque dishonour prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, admission of the cheque and signature raised the statutory presumption under Section 139 in favour of the complainant, but that presumption was rebuttable by a probable defence. The accused succeeded by challenging the complainant's financial capacity to advance the alleged loan, and the complainant failed to explain the source of funds or produce material showing possession of the amount. The court held that the defence needed only to satisfy the standard of preponderance of probability. As the trial court's view was a possible view on the evidence, interference with the acquittal was not warranted. en-us Thu, 26 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 17 Nov 2023 12:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445677 In a cheque dishonour prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, admission of the cheque and signature raised the statutory presumption under Section 139 in favour of the complainant, but that presumption was rebuttable by a probable defence. The accused succeeded by challenging the complainant's financial capacity to advance the alleged loan, and the complainant failed to explain the source of funds or produce material showing possession of the amount. The court held that the defence needed only to satisfy the standard of preponderance of probability. As the trial court's view was a possible view on the evidence, interference with the acquittal was not warranted. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 26 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445677