Wrong Acquittal in 138 NIA Trial In a 138 NIA Trial the liability is not disputed but the accused is acquitted on the logic that the amount due to the complainant was to be recovered in lump sum whereas the cheques represent not the lump sum amount but the part of the amount to be recovered To my mind this is a gross overlook of the Law related to Ch Return by the Trial Court because in the Law itself (Section 139) it is clearly mentioned that “Presumption in favour of holder.—It shall be presumed, unless the contrary is proved, that the holder of a cheque received the cheque of the nature referred to in section 138 for the discharge, in whole or in part, of any debt or other liability.] This being a clear case, yet does any one have any case laws related to lump sum payment / part payment etc mentioned in the Section (Not the case laws regarding the presumption in Section 139)
