https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753378 In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 were held to be rebuttable on a preponderance of probabilities. The accused raised a probable defence that the cheque had been issued only as security for a different transaction, and the evidence also supported the defence case that the payee's name had been inserted in different ink and handwriting. The complainant's inconsistent evidence did not establish that the cheque was issued towards a legally enforceable debt owed to him. In an appeal against acquittal, the reinforced presumption of innocence remained relevant, and no basis was found to interfere with the acquittal. en-us Fri, 12 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 30 May 2024 11:50:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753378 In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 were held to be rebuttable on a preponderance of probabilities. The accused raised a probable defence that the cheque had been issued only as security for a different transaction, and the evidence also supported the defence case that the payee's name had been inserted in different ink and handwriting. The complainant's inconsistent evidence did not establish that the cheque was issued towards a legally enforceable debt owed to him. In an appeal against acquittal, the reinforced presumption of innocence remained relevant, and no basis was found to interfere with the acquittal. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 12 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753378