https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791227 Once execution of a cheque and its dishonour were proved, the statutory presumption of debt and liability under the Negotiable Instruments Act operated in favour of the complainant. The defence that the cheque was not presented, or that procedural gaps such as absence of a deposit slip or reverse-side endorsement weakened the case, was rejected because bank officials' evidence and the return memo established presentation and dishonour for signature mismatch. The presumption was not rebutted on the preponderance of probabilities, and the concurrent findings below were not shown to suffer from perversity, jurisdictional error, or manifest illegality. Revisional interference with the conviction was therefore not warranted. en-us Wed, 06 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 May 2026 07:29:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791227 Once execution of a cheque and its dishonour were proved, the statutory presumption of debt and liability under the Negotiable Instruments Act operated in favour of the complainant. The defence that the cheque was not presented, or that procedural gaps such as absence of a deposit slip or reverse-side endorsement weakened the case, was rejected because bank officials' evidence and the return memo established presentation and dishonour for signature mismatch. The presumption was not rebutted on the preponderance of probabilities, and the concurrent findings below were not shown to suffer from perversity, jurisdictional error, or manifest illegality. Revisional interference with the conviction was therefore not warranted. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 06 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791227