TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Dishonour of Cheques and the Burden of Proof: Rebutting the Presumption u/s 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... - Supreme Court INTRODUCTION 1. This case deals with the core legal question of whether the presumption u/s 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 ("NI Act") regarding the issuance of a cheque towards discharge of a debt or liability can be rebutted by the accused, and if so, the standard of proof required for the same. 2. The factual context involves a cheque issued by the Res....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e successfully rebutted the presumption u/s 139 of the NI Act. COURT DISCUSSIONS AND FINDINGS 5. The Court discussed the provisions of Sections 138, 139, and 140 of the NI Act, which deal with the offence of dishonour of cheques, the presumption in favour of the holder, and the inadmissibility of the defence of lack of reason to believe dishonour, respectively. 6. The Court analyzed the precede....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cheque. ANALYSIS AND DECISION 8. The Court concluded that while the Appellant was able to establish the Respondent's signature on the cheque, raising a presumption u/s 139 of the NI Act, the Respondent successfully rebutted this presumption through the preponderance of probabilities. 9. The Court affirmed the concurrent findings of the Trial Court and the High Court, which acquitted the Res....