9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 394X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hort 'the Act'). 3. The facts leading to this appeal, in a nutshell, are that a Cheque for Rs. 5,00,000/- issued by the appellant in favour of the respondent was dishonoured by the Bank when it was presented for realization by the respondent, as the appellant had instructed the Bank to stop the payment. After receiving such information from the Bank, the respondent served a legal notice calling upon the appellant to pay the Cheque amount. Upon failure of the respondent to obey the legal notice warranting him to pay the Cheque amount of Rs. 5,00,000/-, the respondent filed Complaint Case against the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act. The Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Karwar took cognizance of the offence ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... failed to lead any evidence to corroborate his version that the Cheque issued by the appellant was to discharge the liability towards the complainant. Keeping in mind the corroborative and unshaken defence version, the Trial Court found fault with the complainant-respondent and observed that instead of executing an agreement to sell and instead of repaying the advance money and returning the Cheque, a false complaint was filed by the complainant respondent against the accused-appellant. The Trial Court, therefore, dismissed the complaint and acquitted the accused-appellant of the offence. 6. Against the judgment of the Trial Court dismissing the Complaint and acquitting the accused, the complainant preferred Criminal Appeal before the Hig ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act. Learned counsel, therefore, submitted that the impugned order is not justified and the same deserves to be set aside. 8. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondentcomplainant submitted that there was no error in the impugned judgment and the High Court has rightly allowed the appeal of the complainant. The complainant had raised a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- by obtaining loan from Akshya Bank to extend hand loan to the accused- appellant and 3½ years thereafter, a further sum of Rs. 25,000/- was also given and the Cheque for Rs. 5,00,000/- was meant for the total repayment of the advanced amount of Rs. 1,75,000/-. He further submitted that there was no transaction of sale/purchase of land between the parties and the accus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... examination that after the Cheque was returned without payment, he has not made any enquiry with the Bank as to whether sufficient funds were available or not in the account of the accused. In the absence of any authenticated and supporting evidence, we cannot believe that the complainantrespondent who is employed under the appellant-accused, has raised an amount of Rs. 1,75,000/- that too by obtaining loan of Rs. 1,50,000/- from a Bank, only to give hand loan to his employer. As the complainant himself admitted that his net savings in a year comes to about Rs. 10,000/-, it is not trustworthy that he was in a position to extend hand loan of such big amount to the appellant. 10. Whereas, the evidence of Mr. B.S. Pai (D.W. 2) fully corrobora ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
