https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769261 Interference with an acquittal is confined to exceptional cases where the view taken is perverse, manifestly erroneous, clearly unreasonable, contrary to the evidence, or results in miscarriage of justice; the appellate court may reappreciate evidence but must respect the strengthened presumption of innocence, so routine reversal is impermissible. In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the complainant must prove that the cheque was issued towards a legally enforceable debt or liability. On the facts, the complainant relied on unproved notebooks, printouts, and alleged settlements, but failed to establish a recoverable liability, while the accused raised a probable defence to rebut the statutory presumption. The acquittal was therefore upheld. en-us Thu, 02 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Apr 2025 09:09:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769261 Interference with an acquittal is confined to exceptional cases where the view taken is perverse, manifestly erroneous, clearly unreasonable, contrary to the evidence, or results in miscarriage of justice; the appellate court may reappreciate evidence but must respect the strengthened presumption of innocence, so routine reversal is impermissible. In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the complainant must prove that the cheque was issued towards a legally enforceable debt or liability. On the facts, the complainant relied on unproved notebooks, printouts, and alleged settlements, but failed to establish a recoverable liability, while the accused raised a probable defence to rebut the statutory presumption. The acquittal was therefore upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 02 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769261