https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757342 Once the accused admitted the cheque signature in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the presumptions under Sections 118(a) and 139 arose that the cheque was issued for consideration and towards a debt or liability, shifting the evidential burden to the accused. A bare statement under Section 313 CrPC, without cogent defence evidence or material creating a probable defence on a preponderance of probabilities, was insufficient to rebut those presumptions. The court held that the trial court had erred in assessing alleged defects in the complainant's case before first examining rebuttal, and the acquittal was therefore set aside. en-us Fri, 16 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 22 Aug 2024 14:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757342 Once the accused admitted the cheque signature in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the presumptions under Sections 118(a) and 139 arose that the cheque was issued for consideration and towards a debt or liability, shifting the evidential burden to the accused. A bare statement under Section 313 CrPC, without cogent defence evidence or material creating a probable defence on a preponderance of probabilities, was insufficient to rebut those presumptions. The court held that the trial court had erred in assessing alleged defects in the complainant's case before first examining rebuttal, and the acquittal was therefore set aside. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 16 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757342