https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772892 Admission of issuance of the cheque, coupled with proof of dishonour and service of demand notice, sustained the statutory presumptions under the Negotiable Instruments Act; the accused did not rebut them by his Section 313 CrPC statement or by any defence evidence, so the conviction under Section 138 was upheld in revision. The court found no perversity or patent illegality in the concurrent findings. On sentence, the maximum custodial term and the default term were considered excessive and insufficiently reasoned, so the substantive imprisonment was reduced to six months and the default sentence to three months, while compensation was left undisturbed. en-us Fri, 30 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 13 Jun 2025 18:47:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772892 Admission of issuance of the cheque, coupled with proof of dishonour and service of demand notice, sustained the statutory presumptions under the Negotiable Instruments Act; the accused did not rebut them by his Section 313 CrPC statement or by any defence evidence, so the conviction under Section 138 was upheld in revision. The court found no perversity or patent illegality in the concurrent findings. On sentence, the maximum custodial term and the default term were considered excessive and insufficiently reasoned, so the substantive imprisonment was reduced to six months and the default sentence to three months, while compensation was left undisturbed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 30 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772892