When case set up by holder of cheque is dubious, presumption of lawful consideration should not be drawn

Vijay v. Laxman, (2013) 3 SCC 86

 Ss. 139, 118(a) and 138 - Dishonoured cheque - Presumptions in favour of holder of cheque as to consideration having
been paid by holder and cheque having been received for discharge of debt owed to holder - Scope and rebuttability of
presumptions - Case set up by holder of cheque itself dubious, thus held, initial presumption itself comes to an end -
Cheque presented for payment on same date on which it was purported to have been issued - Cheque dishonoured on
account of insufficiency of funds - Drawer of cheque sought to be prosecuted on the ground that cheque represented
repayment of loan granted for two months - Date of advancement of loan not mentioned in complaint - No reason

forthcoming why drawer would seek loan if he was able to repay it on the same date on which he issued cheque - On the
contrary, respondent-accused's version found more plausible that there was business relationship between him and
appellant complainant's father and cheque was obtained in appellant's favour to secure amount advanced by the father
to respondent - Respondent's version also believed that there was altercation between appellant's father and respondent
one day prior to date of presentation of cheque, and whole exercise relating to dishonour of cheque was to wreak
vengeance against respondent instead of utilising cheque in a business like manner - Held, respondent-accused by
offering a plausible explanation in the face of unusual facts pleaded by appellant, was able to displace presumption
against him - Hence acquittal of respondent-accused, confirmed, (2013) 3 SCC 86-A 
 Debt, Financial and Monetary Laws 
 Negotiable Instruments 
 Ss. 118(a) and 139 - Comparative degree of onus of proof on complainant and drawer of cheque - Reiterated, per
Thakur, J. (supplementing), standard of proof required for rebutting the presumption under Ss. 118 and 139 of the NI Act
is not as high as that required of the prosecution and is rebuttable on the preponderance of probabilities, (2013) 3 SCC
86-B 
 Constitution of India 
 Art. 136 - SLP - Scope of consideration - Miscarriage of justice - Scrutiny of evidence to avoid unwarranted conviction -
Permissibility, (2013) 3 SCC 86-C

Print Page