https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790991 An appeal against acquittal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act failed because the cheque was not shown to have been issued towards an existing enforceable debt or liability. The contract did not refer to the cheque, the instrument was treated as security, and the complainant gave inconsistent accounts about how it was obtained. Non-examination of the person said to have delivered the cheque justified an adverse inference, and the cheque was presented before the report relied on to show defective goods, so liability had not crystallised by presentation or dishonour. The trial court's view was a possible one and was not perverse or legally untenable, so interference was refused. en-us Mon, 04 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 May 2026 09:09:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790991 An appeal against acquittal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act failed because the cheque was not shown to have been issued towards an existing enforceable debt or liability. The contract did not refer to the cheque, the instrument was treated as security, and the complainant gave inconsistent accounts about how it was obtained. Non-examination of the person said to have delivered the cheque justified an adverse inference, and the cheque was presented before the report relied on to show defective goods, so liability had not crystallised by presentation or dishonour. The trial court's view was a possible one and was not perverse or legally untenable, so interference was refused. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 04 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790991