As per case facts, the Petitioner was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for the dishonour of a cheque issued for an accommodation loan. The Petitioner disputed ... this, claiming the cheque was for security for a smaller loan from another person and was misused by the complainant. After the Trial Court convicted him and the Sessions Judge affirmed the conviction, the Petitioner filed this revisional application to the High Court challenging the lower courts' judgments. The question arose whether a legally enforceable debt or liability existed, whether the cheque was issued for its discharge, and if the Petitioner successfully rebutted the statutory presumption. Finally, the High Court dismissed the application, finding no sufficient reason to interfere with the concurrent findings. It held that the complainant proved all ingredients of the offence, and the Petitioner failed to rebut the statutory presumption with reliable evidence, emphasizing the limited scope of re-appreciation of evidence in its revisional jurisdiction.