https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772413 In revisional jurisdiction, additional evidence is permitted only exceptionally where due diligence is shown or the material emerged later, and the revisional court cannot be used to fill gaps in the defence; the request for the customer account ledger was therefore rejected. In a cheque dishonour prosecution, admission of issuance and signatures on the cheque attracted the presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, and a bare plea of security cheque or absence of liability, without credible rebuttal evidence, was insufficient; the conviction was upheld. The sentence of simple imprisonment and compensation were also left undisturbed because they were not shown to be excessive or unreasonable. en-us Mon, 02 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Jun 2025 18:22:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772413 In revisional jurisdiction, additional evidence is permitted only exceptionally where due diligence is shown or the material emerged later, and the revisional court cannot be used to fill gaps in the defence; the request for the customer account ledger was therefore rejected. In a cheque dishonour prosecution, admission of issuance and signatures on the cheque attracted the presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, and a bare plea of security cheque or absence of liability, without credible rebuttal evidence, was insufficient; the conviction was upheld. The sentence of simple imprisonment and compensation were also left undisturbed because they were not shown to be excessive or unreasonable. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 02 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772413