https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768591 A cheque described as a security cheque, when dishonoured with the endorsement "account closed", can still attract Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881; at the quashing stage, the court should not accept disputed factual defences unless supported by unimpeachable material, and the presumption under Section 139 applies once execution is undisputed. A bare plea that the cheque was only security does not by itself negate liability, because questions about intended presentation and existence of legally enforceable debt require evidence at trial. Pendency of SARFAESI recovery proceedings does not bar prosecution under Section 138, as the two remedies operate in different spheres. en-us Tue, 01 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 10 Apr 2025 08:32:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768591 A cheque described as a security cheque, when dishonoured with the endorsement "account closed", can still attract Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881; at the quashing stage, the court should not accept disputed factual defences unless supported by unimpeachable material, and the presumption under Section 139 applies once execution is undisputed. A bare plea that the cheque was only security does not by itself negate liability, because questions about intended presentation and existence of legally enforceable debt require evidence at trial. Pendency of SARFAESI recovery proceedings does not bar prosecution under Section 138, as the two remedies operate in different spheres. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 01 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768591