TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 44X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue belonging to another person invariably other account of accused, signed it. Apart from the presumptions regarding holder considering be it under Section 118 or Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, when the representation is made by issuing cheque and by signing on it, there will not be occasion to doubt as to whether it is mentioned on the cheque that account belongs to another person - The Judgment pronouncing the acquittal of the accused passed by the learned first appellate Judge does not answer the questions of reasonability and legality and it is liable to be set aside. Appeal allowed. - CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 557/2010 - - - Dated:- 9-8-2018 - THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K. SUDHINDRARAO FOR THE PETITIONER : SRI V B S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r their rankings before the trial court. 5. It is stated that accused approached the complainant for financial assistance and was accommodated by the complainant. Amount of ₹ 1,50,000/- was advanced by the complainant by way of cash on 10.08.2007 as hand loan and accused undertook to return the amount within six months but it did not happen. Accused issued a cheque bearing No.734453 dated 17.04.2008 drawn on Canara Bank, Vivekanandanagar, Bengaluru for ₹ 1,50,000/- in favour of the complainant. Over the dishonour of cheque on being presented on 19.04.2008, the complainant followed the necessary legal formalities such as issuing legal notice within the time as stipulated under the Act. It is also claimed that the cheque was pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... submit that the learned first appellate Judge has not considered the presumptive value of the cheque and belated defence taken by the accused which did not possess probative force. The legal position on the matter was not appreciated by the learned Judge as stated above. Though accused is represented by his counsel, learned counsel for respondent-accused is not present. 7. The aspects available in the matter are: Complainant claims to have lent amount of ₹ 1,50,000/- to the accused on 10.08.2007. Accused promises to return the amount within six months but that did not happen and accused issued a cheque that came to be dishonoured. The said loan amount was given in cash by the complainant. Exhibit P-1 is the cheque. It is seen t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the accused and rejected the contention of the complainant consequently dismissed the complaint. Learned appellate Judge in paragraph 12 of the Judgment observes that the act may amount to offence of cheating and does not come under the scope of Negotiable Instruments Act. That pre-supposes the examination of legal position and is made on believing the version of the accused. In the set of circumstances, basically it should be known that the defence or the stand in a legal proceeding should be made known specifically for complete and effective adjudication of the matter. 12. Further, learned trial and the appellate Judge as well have considered the version that the cheque belonging to another person signed by accused. But the difference ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stances the negative approach appears to have entered in the mind of the accused to take unbelievable defence to defeat the rights of a holder of negotiable instrument who is presumed to be holder is due course. Learned trial Judge in her sound reasoning passed a right order convicting the accused. But the first appellate Judge erred in applying legal provisions to the case on hand and set aside the Judgment of the learned trial Judge. The Judgment pronouncing the acquittal of the accused passed by the learned first appellate Judge does not answer the questions of reasonability and legality and it is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, appeal is allowed. Judgment dated 09.04.2010 passed in Criminal Appeal No.25109/2009 by the Additional ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
