The Himachal Pradesh High Court held that an admitted signature on a blank cheque triggers a statutory presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, placing the burden on the accused to rebut it.
Admission of Signature on Blank Cheque Triggers Statutory Presumption
The Himachal Pradesh High Court has ruled that an accused person's admission of signing a blank cheque creates a presumption of liability under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The burden thereby shifts to the accused to rebut the presumption that the cheque was issued for a lawful consideration and that it was dishonoured due to insufficient funds.
The court emphasized that the statutory presumption under Section 139 arises as soon as the signature on the cheque is admitted. This remains true even if the cheque was delivered blank. The accused must provide a plausible explanation for the issuance of the instrument to negate the existence of a legally enforceable debt or liability.
The mere fact that the cheque was blank at the time of signing does not negate the presumption — it is the admission of signature that triggers the statutory consequence.
Implications for Practitioners
Defence strategies in cheque dishonour cases must now more rigorously address the presumption under Section 139. Mere denial of liability is insufficient; the accused must proactively present evidence to disprove the existence of an underlying obligation. The decision reinforces the evidentiary weight of a signed cheque, even in incomplete form, under commercial law.
Citations
- Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Section 139
