9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 394X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellant. There was also no calculation of account or stipulation of any interest on the alleged loan amount to show as to how the amount of ₹ 5,00,000/- was figured, in return of a hand loan of ₹ 1,75,000/-, if at all taken by the appellant from the complainant. In the absence of any authenticated and supporting evidence, we cannot believe that the complainantrespondent who is employed under the appellant-accused, has raised an amount of ₹ 1,75,000/- that too by obtaining loan of ₹ 1,50,000/- from a Bank, only to give hand loan to his employer. As the complainant himself admitted that his net savings in a year comes to about ₹ 10,000/-, it is not trustworthy that he was in a position to extend hand loan of s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e against the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act. The Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Karwar took cognizance of the offence, recorded statement of the complainant under oath, registered the case and summoned the accused-appellant. The appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 4. Before the Trial Court, the complainant-respondent solely led his own evidence as P.W. 1., whereas the appellant-accused in his defence led evidence of six witnesses. The case of the complainant was that he had given a hand loan of ₹ 1,50,000/- to the accused- appellant and three and half years thereafter he had again given ₹ 25,000/- as hand loan, thus in all, the accused-appellant owed him ₹ 1,75,000/- a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itted the accused-appellant of the offence. 6. Against the judgment of the Trial Court dismissing the Complaint and acquitting the accused, the complainant preferred Criminal Appeal before the High Court. The High Court while allowing the appeal, set aside the judgment of the Trial Court and sentenced the appellant-accused to pay a fine of ₹ 8,50,000/- within a period of eight weeks, failing which, to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of six months. Aggrieved by the reversal of his acquittal, the appellant-accused filed the present appeal. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant-accused contended that the Cheque in question was in fact issued as part payment of the agreed sale/purchase of 3 acres of land belonging to the comp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and the Cheque for ₹ 5,00,000/- was meant for the total repayment of the advanced amount of ₹ 1,75,000/-. He further submitted that there was no transaction of sale/purchase of land between the parties and the accused wanted to avoid repayment of the hand loan, in the process of which he instructed the banker not to pass the Cheque. The High Court has, therefore, correctly dealt with the matter and rightly sentenced the accused who, knowing fully the eventuality of the offence, committed the same deliberately. Hence the learned counsel prayed that the appeal lacks merit and the same deserves to be dismissed. 9. We have heard rival contentions of the learned counsel at length. We find from the record that admittedly, the accu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... complainant himself admitted that his net savings in a year comes to about ₹ 10,000/-, it is not trustworthy that he was in a position to extend hand loan of such big amount to the appellant. 10. Whereas, the evidence of Mr. B.S. Pai (D.W. 2) fully corroborates the version of the appellant. He deposed that the talks of sale/purchase of 3 acres of land were held between the parties in his presence. The appellant agreed to purchase 3 acres of land belonging to the complainant and the appellant had paid an amount of ₹ 30,000/- as advance and handed over a Cheque for ₹ 5,00,000/- . It is also noteworthy that the complainant has not rebutted the evidence of D.W. 2 in the cross examination. Further, the firm and unshaken evi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
