Complainant being house wife - failed to prove her means to pay the amount - accused rebutted the presumption - Acquittal upheld.

Citation 

2019 (1) MWN (Cr.) DCC 65 (Mad)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS

P. Velmurugan, J.

P. Dhanam

Vs 

G. Arjunan

CLA No.37 of 2014.

October 11, 2018

NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT, 1881 (26 of 1881), Sections 118 & 139-Statutory Presumption as to issuance of Cheque in discharge of legally enforceable debt - Rebuttal of - Standard of proof - Accused need not produce direct evidence - Probable defence through preponderance of probability sufficient Case of Complainant that Accised borrowed Rs.15,00,000 with Interest at 1% p.m. on various dates with promise to repay within 3 months- Accused denied having borrowed money and disputed means of Complainant to lend such a huge amount Complainant, a housewife, stated in chief examination that her son sold land and gave Rs.15 lakhs to be kept with her But, stated in cross examination that she lent money from and out of sale proceeds of her jewels-Contradictory version creating doubt - Complainant not examined her son to prove source- Huge money lent without executing any documents Even while demanding money back, Complainant not obtained any document - Cheque issued thereafter being a signed blank Cheque, highly doubtful - Accused rebutted presumption Complainant failed to prove its case as projected in Complaint Benefit of doubt rightly extended to Accused by Lower Appellate Court-Appeal against acquittal dismissed. (Paras 7 to 9]

CASES REFERRED