Non-production of cash and accounts book is not fatal to a proceeding under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act

The Supreme Court in the matter of D.K. Chandel vs. M/s Wockhardt Ltd. & Anr., Criminal Appeal Nos. 132 of 2020 on 04.02.2020 held that a statutory presumption is raised in favour of a holder of a cheque under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act that the cheque was issued in discharge of a debt.
Facts
The accused person purchased pesticides from the complainant company and issued the subject cheque for repayment thereof. The subject cheque was dishonoured and the complainant initiated proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Trial Court found the accused guilty. Upon appeal, the first appellate court set aside the judgment of the trial court and acquitted the accused holding that the complainant failed to prove that the amount was due and payable as it had not produced cash and account books as proof. The High Court went on to set aside the judgment of the first appellate court against which the accused filed the present appeal.
Issue
Whether debt due and payable is liable to be proved in a proceeding under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.
Ratio
The Supreme Court held that production of the account books/cash book may be relevant in the civil court. However, it is not crucial to produce the same in a criminal case filed under Section 138 of the N.I.Act. This is because of the presumption raised in favour of the holder of the cheque that the cheque was issued in discharge of a debt.