https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313819 Under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, a conviction requires proof that the cheque was issued in discharge of a legally enforceable debt, and the Section 139 presumption is rebuttable. The complainant failed to support the alleged loan with income-tax returns or books of account, did not state when the loan was advanced, and produced a cheque appearing to be filled in with different inks. Those circumstances made the security-cheque defence plausible and created doubt about the prosecution case, so leave to appeal was rightly refused and the acquittal was upheld. en-us Fri, 24 Aug 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 May 2024 14:09:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313819 Under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, a conviction requires proof that the cheque was issued in discharge of a legally enforceable debt, and the Section 139 presumption is rebuttable. The complainant failed to support the alleged loan with income-tax returns or books of account, did not state when the loan was advanced, and produced a cheque appearing to be filled in with different inks. Those circumstances made the security-cheque defence plausible and created doubt about the prosecution case, so leave to appeal was rightly refused and the acquittal was upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 24 Aug 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313819