SADIQ HUSSAIN Vs. SHRISHTI FABRICS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner's conviction and sentence for the offence under Section 138 of The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 stand affirmed vide impugned order of 7th March, 2013. Learned counsel for petitioner had assailed the impugned order on the following five grounds:--

(2.) It would be pertinent to note that petitioner has not disputed the signatures on the cheque in question and so, statutory presumption arises against petitioner. Whether petitioner has been able to rebut statutory presumption raised against him, is the moot question which is required to be considered. This Court is conscious that an accused is not required to lead evidence to rebut the statutory presumption if it could be shown or gathered from the material on record or the evidence of complainant that the statutory presumption stands rebutted.

(3.) Upon hearing petitioner's counsel and on perusal of the impugned order and the material on record, I find that afore-noted grounds on which impugned order is assailed have been adequately dealt by the appellate court in paragraphs No. 3 to 8.