https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793767 In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the conviction could not be sustained where the complainant failed to prove the source of funds and financial capacity to advance the alleged loan; the absence of bank statements, income-tax returns, or similar material weakened the statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139, and the finding went in favour of the accused. The conviction also failed because the statutory demand notice was not duly served on the drawer, as the notice was received by another person and mandatory compliance with clause (b) of the proviso to Section 138 was not shown. The accused was therefore acquitted. en-us Thu, 18 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 24 Jun 2026 07:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793767 In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the conviction could not be sustained where the complainant failed to prove the source of funds and financial capacity to advance the alleged loan; the absence of bank statements, income-tax returns, or similar material weakened the statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139, and the finding went in favour of the accused. The conviction also failed because the statutory demand notice was not duly served on the drawer, as the notice was received by another person and mandatory compliance with clause (b) of the proviso to Section 138 was not shown. The accused was therefore acquitted. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 18 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793767