https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764406 Revisional interference in a Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act conviction is confined to examining legality, correctness and propriety of the concurrent findings, and a revisional court does not act as a second appellate court. Once the cheque signatures were admitted, presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 arose that the cheque was issued for consideration and in discharge of a legally enforceable debt, and the accused failed to rebut them by a probable defence. A bare plea that the cheque was lost or misused, unsupported by complaint or evidence, was insufficient, and dishonour on stop-payment instructions remained within Section 138. The conviction was upheld and no revisional interference was warranted. en-us Tue, 24 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 Jan 2025 08:57:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764406 Revisional interference in a Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act conviction is confined to examining legality, correctness and propriety of the concurrent findings, and a revisional court does not act as a second appellate court. Once the cheque signatures were admitted, presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 arose that the cheque was issued for consideration and in discharge of a legally enforceable debt, and the accused failed to rebut them by a probable defence. A bare plea that the cheque was lost or misused, unsupported by complaint or evidence, was insufficient, and dishonour on stop-payment instructions remained within Section 138. The conviction was upheld and no revisional interference was warranted. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 24 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764406