https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785922 In a Section 138 NI Act prosecution, the statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 were rebutted where the accused showed a probable defence that the cheque was issued only as a security instrument in a sale transaction. The complainant's suppression of the prior dealings, including the registered sale agreement, power of attorney, cancellation, and related civil proceedings, weakened the claim of a legally enforceable debt. The trial court's finding that the cheque was not issued in discharge of an enforceable liability and that the complainant had not approached the court with clean hands was held to be a plausible view, so the acquittal was not interfered with. en-us Wed, 21 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Feb 2026 08:38:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785922 In a Section 138 NI Act prosecution, the statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 were rebutted where the accused showed a probable defence that the cheque was issued only as a security instrument in a sale transaction. The complainant's suppression of the prior dealings, including the registered sale agreement, power of attorney, cancellation, and related civil proceedings, weakened the claim of a legally enforceable debt. The trial court's finding that the cheque was not issued in discharge of an enforceable liability and that the complainant had not approached the court with clean hands was held to be a plausible view, so the acquittal was not interfered with. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 21 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785922