https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772638 In a prosecution under the Negotiable Instruments Act, the High Court held that once the complainant established execution of the cheque through admitted signature and issuance, the statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 arose and the burden shifted to the accused to rebut them. The complainant's testimony, surrounding circumstances, and bank statement supporting availability of funds were sufficient to prove the transaction, while the accused failed to displace the presumption. The complainant's inability to identify who filled up the cheque or to produce title documents for the property allegedly sold did not negate liability. The acquittal was therefore unsustainable and the conviction under Section 138 was restored. en-us Wed, 04 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 11 Jun 2025 18:32:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772638 In a prosecution under the Negotiable Instruments Act, the High Court held that once the complainant established execution of the cheque through admitted signature and issuance, the statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 arose and the burden shifted to the accused to rebut them. The complainant's testimony, surrounding circumstances, and bank statement supporting availability of funds were sufficient to prove the transaction, while the accused failed to displace the presumption. The complainant's inability to identify who filled up the cheque or to produce title documents for the property allegedly sold did not negate liability. The acquittal was therefore unsustainable and the conviction under Section 138 was restored. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 04 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772638