TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 506X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s double presumption in favour of the accused. Firstly, the presumption of innocence is available to him and the fundamental principle of criminal justice delivery system is that every person, accused of committing an offence shall be presumed to be innocent, unless his guilt is proved by a competent Court of law. Secondly, if the accused has secured an order of acquittal, the presumption of his innocence is reaffirmed and strengthened by the trial Court. Even if two reasonable conclusions are possible on the basis of evidence on record, the appellate Court should not disturb the finding of the acquittal recorded by the trial Court. Appeal dismissed. - Crl.A.No. 315 of 2009 - - - Dated:- 31-8-2018 - Mr. R. Pongiappan J. For the Appellant : Mr.N.Manokaran For the Respondent : Mr.Naveen Kumar Murthi JUDGMENT This appeal is directed against the order of acquittal dated 04.05.2009 in C.C.No.19 of 2008 on the file of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Erode. 2. The case of the appellant / complainant in brief, is as follows: 2.1. The appellant / complainant is a civil engineer residing in Kunnathur. The respondent / accused is the resident of Avanp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing to Crime No.305 of 2004 registered in Uthukuli Police Station, Erode District. 2.8. In an evidence given by the respondent [R.W.1], he has stated that prior to the institution of the case, the appellant is not known to him, there is no loan transaction or any other transaction had happened with the appellant. Further, he has stated after signing in the cheque the same has been given to one S.Manivannan, who is erstwhile business partner in the lorry business. He has further stated for running the said business loan was availed from Sakthi Finance, some time later due to the loss of the said business, both were decided to close the business. At that time for settling the dues, the respondent gave an Ambassador Car bearing Registration No.MTK 3699 to his partner along with the blank cheque for a sum of ₹ 60,000/-. He has stated that the particulars of the cheque issued in favour of the said Manivannan has been entered into the counterfoil of the cheque book. Finally, he gave ₹ 45,000/- to Manivannan in the presence of R.W.2 [Kuthabiran] and after receiving the said amount, the said Manivannan had issued receipt under Ex.R.4. Subsequently, for collecting the remai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the aforesaid circumstances, it was not even necessary for the appellant to produce any document to the effect that it had fulfilled the obligation under the agreement which was entered into between the parties. The case was founded on the dishonour of the two cheques and not on the basis of the said agreement. Further, it was not a civil suit which was filed on the basis of the said agreement or any demand was raised for money on the ground that the agreement had been fulfilled. The case is that the payment was not released. It is here where the High Court has fell in legal error. 6. Further, in the celebrated judgment of our Honourable Apex Court in RANGAPPA vs. SRI MOHAN reported in [2010] 11 SCC 441 wherein, it has observed as follows : 18. Ordinarily in cheque bouncing cases, what the courts have to consider is whether the ingredients of the offence enumerated in Section 138 of the Act have been met and if so, whether the accused was able to rebut the statutory presumption contemplated by Section 139 of the Act. With respect to the facts of the present case, it must be clarified that contrary to the trial court's finding, Section 138 of the Act can in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... accused as alleged by the complainant is disputed on the side of the respondent. Even in the reply notice sent to the complainant in the earliest stage, it was mentioned as the complainant is a stranger to him. On the other hand, in order to prove the friendship, and to show the business relationship, no document was produced on the side of the complainant. Furthermore, the amount of ₹ 2 lakhs is not a meager amount. So, we cannot expect even a common prudent man giving the loan of ₹ 2 lakhs to a stranger without getting any document. In this regard, the judgment of our Honourable Apex Court in JOHN K. ABRAHAM vs. SIMON C.ABRAHAM AND ANOTHER reported in [2014] 2 SCC 236 , in which, it has held as follows: 9.It has to be stated that in order to draw the presumption under Section 118 read along with Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the burden was heavily upon the complainant to have shown that he had the required funds for having advanced the money to the accused; that the issuance of the cheque in support of the said payment advanced was true and that the accused was bound to make the payment as had been agreed while issuing the cheque in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nts to show his source for advancing huge amount as a loan to various persons. So, this reason also creates a doubt over the case of the complainant. Hence, I am of the opinion that the reasons mentioned in the judgment rendered by the trial Court is convincing one. 14. Generally, in an appeal against acquittal, there is double presumption in favour of the accused. Firstly, the presumption of innocence is available to him and the fundamental principle of criminal justice delivery system is that every person, accused of committing an offence shall be presumed to be innocent, unless his guilt is proved by a competent Court of law. Secondly, if the accused has secured an order of acquittal, the presumption of his innocence is reaffirmed and strengthened by the trial Court. Even if two reasonable conclusions are possible on the basis of evidence on record, the appellate Court should not disturb the finding of the acquittal recorded by the trial Court. In the above said circumstances, I find no reason to interfere with the impugned order of acquittal passed by the trial Court. Hence, the appeal fails and the same is deserves to be dismissed. 15. In the result, the Criminal App ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
