As per the case facts, a partnership firm appealed against a High Court decision that upheld the acquittal of a respondent in a case concerning dishonored cheques under the Negotiable ... Instruments Act. The firm had filed complaints after the respondent's cheques bounced due to insufficient funds. However, the respondent provided a credible explanation for the funds being in her account, and both lower appellate courts concluded that no enforceable debt or liability existed. The appeal to the Supreme Court aimed to challenge this finding. The question arose whether the High Court's finding of no enforceable debt or liability, which led to the respondent's acquittal, was flawed or lacked evidentiary basis, thereby justifying intervention by the Supreme Court. Finally, the Supreme Court affirmed that there was no flaw in the High Court's or the First Appellate Court's finding against the complainant/petitioner. The Court determined that these findings were not flawed or without evidence, and no significant legal issue was present to warrant its intervention. Consequently, the petitions were dismissed.