https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763866 In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, admitted execution of the cheque and signature triggered the presumptions under Sections 118(a) and 139 in favour of the complainant, but the accused could rebut them on a preponderance of probabilities by showing a probable defence. The evidence of a competing transaction, supporting documents, and unexplained suspicious circumstances created doubt about the alleged consideration and the underlying debt. Once that probable defence was raised, the burden shifted back to the complainant to prove the legally enforceable liability, which he failed to do. In an appeal against acquittal, the presumption of innocence was reinforced, and the HC found no basis to interfere with the trial court's plausible view, so the acquittal was confirmed. en-us Mon, 09 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 31 Dec 2024 08:43:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763866 In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, admitted execution of the cheque and signature triggered the presumptions under Sections 118(a) and 139 in favour of the complainant, but the accused could rebut them on a preponderance of probabilities by showing a probable defence. The evidence of a competing transaction, supporting documents, and unexplained suspicious circumstances created doubt about the alleged consideration and the underlying debt. Once that probable defence was raised, the burden shifted back to the complainant to prove the legally enforceable liability, which he failed to do. In an appeal against acquittal, the presumption of innocence was reinforced, and the HC found no basis to interfere with the trial court's plausible view, so the acquittal was confirmed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 09 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763866