2020 (12) TMI 143 - HC - Indian Laws

Dishonor of Cheque - acquittal of the accused - rebuttal of presumption - Offence took place or not - HELD THAT - The trial court acquitted the accused mainly for the reason that, according to the complainant the alleged transaction was in 2003 and the cheque was issued during that period. But the accused submitted that, during that period he was not conducting any textiles business and he proved it. After perusing the entire oral and documentary evidence, the trial court concluded that, the accused rebuttted the presumption. Therefore, the accused is acquitted. The trial court after considering the entire oral and documentary evidence came to a definite conclusion that, the appellant is not able to proved the offence - the accused was acquitted. The acquittal order upheld - appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
2. Acquittal of the accused by the trial court.
3. Appeal against the acquittal order.

Analysis:
1. The case involved the prosecution of the accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act based on allegations that a cheque issued by the accused for a certain amount was dishonored due to insufficient funds. The complainant presented evidence, including witness testimony and documents, to support the case. However, the trial court found the accused not guilty under Section 138 and acquitted him based on the defense's arguments and evidence presented.

2. The trial court's decision to acquit the accused was primarily based on the defense's assertion that the accused was not conducting any textile business during the relevant period when the alleged transaction took place. The court examined various pieces of evidence, including documents such as licenses and bills, to determine the credibility of the complainant's claims. The court noted discrepancies in the evidence presented by the complainant, such as inconsistencies in signatures and lack of supporting records required by tax laws. Ultimately, the trial court concluded that the accused successfully rebutted the presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, leading to the acquittal.

3. Upon review, the higher court found no reason to interfere with the trial court's acquittal order. The appellate judge noted that the trial court had thoroughly considered all oral and documentary evidence before reaching a decision. As the appellant failed to prove the offense beyond a reasonable doubt, the acquittal order was upheld. Consequently, the criminal appeal was dismissed, affirming the judgment of the trial court in the case.

This detailed analysis highlights the legal proceedings, evidence presented, and the reasoning behind the trial court's decision to acquit the accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, as well as the appellate court's confirmation of the acquittal order.