In Brief
A cheque drawer cannot escape liability under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act merely by claiming the payee is in a fiduciary relationship with him. The Supreme Court held that the presumption under Section 139—that a cheque was issued to discharge a debt—is rebuttable, but the burden lies on the accused to prove otherwise through cogent evidence. A high court erred in reversing concurrent trial and appellate convictions based on a fiduciary relationship argument. The court also clarified that filling in a blank signed cheque does not constitute alteration. The conviction was restored with enhanced fine as compensation.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.