2023 (10) TMI 584 - HC - Indian Laws

Dishonour of Cheque - insufficient funds - acquittal of accused - discharge of a legally enforceable debt or not - complainant proved the offence under Section 138 of the NI Act against the accused beyond reasonable doubt or not - HELD THAT - The claim of the complainant before a competent Senior Civil Judge claiming huge amount of Rs. 75,000/- was disbelieved by holding the amount due was only Rs. 25,000/-. So, in such circumstances, it is really doubtful as to whether accused could have issued Ex.P-1 for a sum of Rs. 75,000/-. So, important link is missing in the evidence to connect Ex. P-1 with that of a legally enforceable debt pertaining to the chit transaction. Though, there is no dispute about the factum of dishonor of cheque but the complainant has to establish that it was issued towards discharge of a legally enforceable debt. The evidence on record would not at all prove all those aspects. This Appeal is against an order of acquittal. Having gone through the judgment of the trial Court, as above, it cannot be held that the learned III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class decided the matter with any unreasonable grounds. There are no reasons whatsoever to interfere with the judgment in Calendar Case No. 101 of 2002, dated 20.06.2007, on the file of the Court of III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kakinada. The complainant miserably failed to prove the offence under Section 138 of the NI Act against the respondent/accused beyond reasonable doubt. Appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues involved:
The judgment involves the appeal against the acquittal of the respondent/accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 by the III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kakinada, East Godavari District.

Issue 1: Proof of issuance of cheque for a legally enforceable debt
The complainant alleged that the accused issued a cheque towards a chit transaction debt, but the evidence presented was deemed insufficient. The trial judge noted discrepancies in the amount due as per a civil case judgment and the lack of a clear connection between the cheque and the debt. The complainant's failure to establish a legally enforceable debt led to the dismissal of the appeal.

Issue 2: Proof of offence under Section 138 of the NI Act
The appellant argued that the trial judge erred in finding the accused not guilty, while the respondent contended that the complainant failed to provide adequate evidence linking the cheque to a specific debt. The judgment highlighted the importance of establishing a clear connection between the cheque issued and the debt owed, emphasizing that the evidence did not meet the threshold of proof beyond reasonable doubt.

Issue 3: Sustainability of the impugned judgment
The judgment affirmed the trial court's decision, stating that there were no grounds to interfere. It emphasized the complainant's failure to prove the offence under Section 138 of the NI Act beyond reasonable doubt, leading to the dismissal of the criminal appeal and confirmation of the original judgment.

The judgment thoroughly analyzed the evidence presented, including witness testimonies and documentary proof, to determine the lack of a legally enforceable debt connection to the cheque issued by the accused. The decision underscored the importance of meeting the burden of proof in establishing the offence under Section 138 of the NI Act. Ultimately, the appeal was dismissed, and the original judgment of acquittal was upheld by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh.