"Feelingagieued and dis:di:lied atitb tlte Judgnert passed lry the appe/late Court aflminq tlte conaittion of- tbe at:cased ander section 1J8 of the N.l. ,4d, lhe accased prefered three dffirent reuision applications before tbe t ttgh(.0ufl. B1' the impagned czmmon Jadgnent and order, the I7 tgL Court ha: ,neuerted the concurent fndings ruorded lty both tlte Cauft.r below and hat acqaitted the accused on the ground that it the contplaint, the czT Pkinant has not speczfm/l5, 37ort, r nature of t'ransactions and source of fund. Houeaer the H rgb Corn note the presumpion under section I )9 of tbe N.l. Act. Al per section 1)9 of the N.I-Act, it rhall be prerilmed, anless the contrary is proued, that the holder oJ a cbeqae ruc)rcd tbe rbeqae of the nature refened to in section l)8 for dtscbarry, in wbole are in part, of atE debt or other /iubi/i!,.-l'hereJitre, once the iniial barden is di:charged b1, the conplainant tbat the cheque wat usaed b1, the accased and tt .rignature and lbe issuance oJ the cheque it ilat disP/lled by te atcused, in lhal case, the onus u.,ill $tft upon lhe accased lo prot'e tbe contru7, tbat the cbeqae wat notfor any debt or other liabiliry. The presumfition ander Section 139 of tbc N.I. Act i.t d rtdttttlry Preumption and thereaJter, znce it is Pre med lhdt the cheque is issued in uhoh or in part of ary dcbt or other /iabi/i4 uhich is in Jarotr of tbe
