TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 270X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not produce any substantial document to prove his claim, except production of disputed cheque/Ex.P1. It is settled proposition of law, in criminal case, the burden of proof on the side of the prosecution only, if it is private complaint then the complainant has to prove his case. In the present case on hand the accused entered into witness box and stoutly denied the execution of cheque and the signature found on the cheque, it is for the complainant to substantiate his claim beyond reasonable doubts in the manner known to law. This Court is inclined to set aside the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial Court and confirmed by the lower appellate Court by judgment dated 23.11.2012 - revision allowed. - Crl.R.C.No.136 of 2013 - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... prisonment for a period of three months. Aggrieved against which, the accused had filed an appeal in C.A.No.138 of 2012 before the learned I Additional Sessions Judge, Erode. The lower appellate Court, being a fact finding Court re- appreciated entire evidence, and after giving due opportunities to both the parties, dismissed the appeal by judgment dated 23.11.2012 and confirmed the conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court. 4 Aggrieved against the said judgment dated 23.11.2012 made in C.A.No.138 of 2012, the accused has preferred this present criminal revision before this Court. 5 The learned counsel for the petitioner/accused would submit that when the appellant/accused entered into witness box and stoutly denied the is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o.1293 of 2006 in the case of Kalyani Baskar vs. M.S.Sampoornam and judgment rendered by the High Court of Kerala reported in ILR 2009 (3) Kerala 43 . The Courts below, after considering all these aspects, had acquitted the accused. 7 Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record. 8 On a careful reading of the complaint, it reveals that the respondent/complainant stated that there is money transaction between the appellant/accused and respondent/complainant, whereas in the deposition he has clearly stated that he knows the accused from childhood and the accused used to come his father's Cycle Shop and there is no money transactions between him and the appellant/accused. B ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
