9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 1335X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the learned trial Court. Further, it is the settled proposition of law that whenever two views are possible, the view which goes in favour of acquittal, is to be followed by the courts. In this view of the matter, it is unhesitatingly held that the impugned judgment of acquittal is well justified on facts as well as in law and the same deserves to be upheld, for this reason as well. It is unhesitatingly held that the learned trial Court was well-justified on facts as well as in law, for passing the impugned judgment of acquittal and the same deserves to be upheld, for this reason as well. - CRM-A NOS. 1307-MA TO 1314-MA OF 2014 - - - Dated:- 28-7-2015 - RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK, J. For The Applicant : A.P.S. Mann and Daman Dhir Advs. For The Respondent : Satish Goel, Sukhwinder Singh and Pankaj Bhardwaj, Advs. ORDER 1. These eight identical applications under Section 378 (4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('Cr.P.C.' for short), seeking leave to file appeal against the impugned judgment of acquittal, bearing CRM-A-1307-MA-2014, CRM-A-1308-MA-2014, CRM-A-1309-MA-2014, CRM-A-1310-MA-2014, CRM-A-1311-MA-2014, CRM-A-1312-MA-2014, CRM-A-1313-MA-2014 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of accusation was served upon the accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act ('N.I. Act' for short). Accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 6. In order to substantiate the allegations levelled in the complaint, the applicant-complainant produced documentary as well as oral evidence. On closing of the evidence of complainant, statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. All the incriminating material brought on record was put to the accused. They denied the allegations, alleged false implication and claimed complete innocence. Accused also led their oral as well as documentary evidence, in their defence. 7. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the evidence brought on record, the learned trial came to the conclusion that the complainant-applicant has failed to bring home the guilt against the accused. Accordingly, the complaint was dismissed and the accused were acquited of the charges framed against them, vide impugned judgment of acquittal dated 26.03.2014. Since the complainant-applicant filed as many as eight identical complaints and all the eight complaints were dismissed by the learned tria ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as considered each and every relevant aspect of the matter, before passing the impugned judgment. Documentary as well as oral evidence brought on record by both the parties, was examined, considered and appreciated in the correct perspective, before arriving at a judicious conclusion. Having said that, this Court feels no hesitation to conclude that the learned trial Court committed no error of law, while passing the impugned judgments of acquittal and the same deserve to be upheld. 12. In view of the nature of controversy involved, the learned trial Court was well-justified in holding that the cheque in question was issued on account of security and not to discharge the existing financial liability. Relevant observations made by the learned trial Court in paras 22 to 27 of the impugned judgment of acquittal, which deserve to be noticed here, read as under: - Since complainant has taken the plea that cheque in question was issued on account of security against shortage of rice, so the complainant was under bounden duty to prove any such shortage in the stock of accused No.1. In the present complaint, testimony of CW6 Waryam Singh branch officer of Markfed is very much materi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ge in the stock of accused No.1. Further, it is not case of the complainant department that rice was not supplied to FCI and if supplied how rice was short as no official from the FCI has been examined by the complainant to state on oath in this regard. Furthermore, it is settled principle that if cheque is issued on account of security, it does not attract provisions of Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act. In this regard, Ld. Defence counsel has relied upon the case law Sudhir Kumar Bhalla vs. Jagdish Chand ors. 2009 (2) Criminal Court Cases 0199, wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that provisions of S.138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act are attracted only on account of dishonor of cheque issued in discharge of liability or debt, but not on account of issuance of security cheque. Further ld. Counsel has placed reliance upon case law, M.S. Naranyana Menon@ Mani vs State of Kerala Anr wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that dishonr of cheque, if issued for security or for any other purpose the same does not come within the purview of S.138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881. Further in case law, The Punjab State Cooperative Supply and Marketing Feder ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for this reason as well. 15. The view taken by this Court also finds support from the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Arulvelu v. State 2009 (4) RCR (Crl.) 638. The relevant observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in para Nos.39, 40 and 41 in the case of Arulvelu's case (supra) read as under: In Ghurey Lal v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2008) 10 SCC 450, a two Judge Bench of this Court of which one of us (Bhandari, J.) was a member had an occasion to deal with most of the cases referred in this judgment. This Court provided guidelines for the Appellate Court in dealing with the cases in which the trial courts have acquitted the accused. The following principles emerge from the cases above: 1. The accused is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty. The accused possessed this presumption when he was before the trial court. The trial court's acquittal bolsters the presumption that he is innocent. 2. The power of reviewing evidence is wide and the appellate court can re-appreciate the entire evidence on record. It can review the trial court's conclusion with respect to both facts and law, but the Appellate Court must give du ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
