2019 (4) TMI 2088 - HC - Indian Laws

Dishonor of Cheque - insufficient funds - statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure recorded by the learned trial Court, wherein he claimed innocence and pleaded false implication - Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act - HELD THAT - The charge against the accused would be concluded hence to be cogently proven, upon, (a) cheque, borne in Ex.CW1/A being proven to be in the handwriting of the accused, (b) return memo, borne in Ex.CW1/B, containing recitals qua, upon, presentation of Ex.CW1/A, before the bank concerned, it being refused to be honoured also hence being proven, to, be issued, from, the bank concerned. The complainant may, upon, recoursing to an appropriate remedy, cast under the provisions of Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, rather could there through strive to prove the afore cheque, borne in Ex.CW1/A, carrying the authentic signatures of the accused, (a) and, thereafter it, was permissible for the complainant, to rely upon the statutory provisions, cast under the provisions of Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, qua his holding it in discharge, of, a contractual or other legal liabilities, arising inter se him, and, the accused. Nonetheless, dehors, the afore curative recoursings, for, hence, dispelling, the, effect, of Ex.CW1/A, rather being feigned, in the testification rendered hence by the complainant, to, hence assuredly contain the signatures of the accused, also, the mandate of, Section 146 of the Negotiable instrument Act, provisions whereof stand extracted hereinafter, was, also vis-a-vis, Ex.CW1/B, the purported return memo given Ex.CW1/A, hence enjoined, to be cogently satiated. Even though, the court is statutorily empowered, to, qua the apposite return memo hence enunciating, the, declining to honour the negotiable instrument concerned, rather avail the apposite therewith presumption, as, engrafted therein, yet the afore presumption would be aptly galvanized, upon, the memo evidently carrying thereon, the official mark, and, seal, of the bank concerned - this Court holds that the learned trial Court, has appraised the entire evidence on record in a wholesome and harmonious manner, apart therefrom, the analysis of the material, on record, by the learned trial court, hence, also does not suffer from any gross perversity or absurdity of mis-appreciation, and, non appreciation of germane thereto evidence, on record. Appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Appeal against the verdict of acquittal in a case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
2. Dispute over the dishonored post-dated cheque issued for the purchase of apple crop.
3. Contention of proper appreciation of evidence leading to findings of acquittal by the trial court.
4. Arguments for reversal of acquittal and imposition of conviction.
5. Defense's stance on the balanced appreciation of evidence by the trial court.

Analysis:
1. The judgment involves an appeal against the acquittal verdict in a case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The case originated from a dispute regarding a post-dated cheque issued for the purchase of an apple crop. The complainant alleged that the accused failed to honor the cheque, leading to legal proceedings.

2. The trial court found sufficient evidence to proceed against the accused, who claimed innocence and false implication during the trial. The complainant's evidence and the accused's statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure were crucial in the proceedings. However, the trial court ultimately acquitted the accused based on its evaluation of the evidence.

3. The appellant contended that the trial court's findings of acquittal were based on a misappreciation of the evidence on record. It was argued that the acquittal should be reversed, and a conviction imposed due to what was perceived as a flawed assessment by the trial court.

4. On the other hand, the respondent's counsel argued that the trial court's acquittal was a result of a mature and balanced appreciation of the evidence. The defense maintained that there was no need for any interference in the trial court's decision, advocating for the acquittal to be upheld.

5. The judgment delves into the specifics of the evidence presented, including the examination of the cheque and return memo. The court analyzed the statutory provisions related to the presumption of dishonor of a cheque and the requirements for rebutting such presumptions. Ultimately, the court concluded that the trial court had appropriately evaluated the evidence, finding no basis for overturning the acquittal.

In conclusion, the appeal was dismissed, affirming the trial court's judgment of acquittal. The court found no merit in the appellant's arguments for reversal, maintaining the decision and disposing of all pending applications.