As per the case facts, an individual was prosecuted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for an offense. The individual appealed the High Court's rejection of their application ... seeking comparison of signatures through a handwriting expert and summoning a Post Office official, bringing the matter to the Supreme Court. The question arose whether the lower courts erred in not assisting the accused in collecting defense evidence or examining the issue of non-receipt of notice. Finally, the Supreme Court found no error in the impugned orders, stating that presumptions under the NI Act operate in favor of the complainant and it is for the accused to rebut them by leading appropriate defense evidence, and the court is not expected to assist in collecting evidence for the accused. The High Court also rightly rejected the application for summoning the Post Office official, as the appellate court can examine the notice issue based on existing evidence.