https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793198 Stop-payment dishonour may attract liability for cheque dishonour where cheque execution is admitted or proved and the statutory presumption of a legally enforceable debt arises. The drawer must rebut that presumption through a probable defence; stop-payment instructions alone do not negate liability. In an appeal against acquittal, interference is justified where findings reflect manifest illegality, material evidence is not considered, or settled legal principles are misapplied. Failure to apply the reverse-onus framework and properly assess the statutory presumptions justified setting aside the acquittal and remitting the complaint proceedings for reconsideration on the correct legal footing. en-us Mon, 18 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 11 Jun 2026 10:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793198 Stop-payment dishonour may attract liability for cheque dishonour where cheque execution is admitted or proved and the statutory presumption of a legally enforceable debt arises. The drawer must rebut that presumption through a probable defence; stop-payment instructions alone do not negate liability. In an appeal against acquittal, interference is justified where findings reflect manifest illegality, material evidence is not considered, or settled legal principles are misapplied. Failure to apply the reverse-onus framework and properly assess the statutory presumptions justified setting aside the acquittal and remitting the complaint proceedings for reconsideration on the correct legal footing. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 18 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793198