9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 410X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... anner and the analysis of the learned trial Court hence suffers from a perversity or absurdity of mis-appreciation and non-appreciation of evidence on record. The impugned judgment is quashed and set aside - appeal allowed. - Cr.Appeal No. 168 of 2018 - - - Dated:- 17-9-2018 - Mr. Sureshwar Thakur, Judge. For the Appellant: Mr. Dibender Ghosh, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr. Naveen K. Bhardwaj, Adv. ORDER SURESHWAR THAKUR, JUDGE(ORAL). The instant appeal stand directed, against, the verdict rendered by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lahaul Spiti, at Kullu, in criminal case No. 139-1 of 2011, whereunder, she returned findings of acquittal, upon, the accused in respect of charges framed, under, Sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ional Bank, Jari Tehsil and District Kullu, amounting to ₹ 1, 92, 000 Ext. C-1, in partial discharge of the liability of ₹ 2, 72, 000/- The aforesaid cheque, on presentation for encashment, was dishonoured, for stop payment . The complainant requested the accused to make payment, but to no avail. Ultimately, on 22.2.2011, the complainants issued legal notice Ext. C-2 through registered post as well as UPC calling upon him to make payment of cheque amount. The accused however, instead of making of payment of the cheque amount, gave false reply, through his counsel. 3. The complainant led preliminary evidence, before the learned trial Magistrate, and, thereafter the accused was directed to be summoned, for, his committing, an, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appearing for the respondent, has with considerable force and vigour, contended that the findings of acquittal, recorded by the Court below rather standing based on a mature and balanced appreciation, by it, of evidence on record, and, theirs not necessitating interference, rather theirs meriting vindication. 8. This Court with the able assistance of the learned counsel on either side, has, with studied care and incision, evaluated the entire evidence on record. 9. The respondent/accused, issued a cheque, vis- -vis, the complainant. The afore cheque bears No. TPX876992, of, 27.9.2010, and, carries, therein a sum of ₹ 1, 92, 000. The afore cheque stood issued against the saving bank account No. 2216000100012876, maintained by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dent/accused, vis- -vis the complainants/appellants, being towards sale(s) thereof, and, it appertaining towards discharge, of, an apt contractual liability. 10. Be that as it may, even if the aforesaid inference(s), are, sparked by the afore acquiescing(s), existing in the cross-examination, of, the complainants, the learned trial Judge yet concluded that with the statutory presumption, borne in Section 139, of, the Negotiable Instrument Act, provision(s) whereof stand extracted hereinafter: 139. Presumption in favour of holder -It shallbe presumed, unless the contrary is proved, that the holder of a cheque received the cheque of the nature referred to in section 138 for the discharge, in whole or in part, or any debt or other liab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vii) Even though, he further reared a contention, that, the appellant/complainant, had, from the stolen cheque book, hence made use of some leaves, and had, thereafter foisted a false complaint, against him, (viii) however, even the aforesaid contention, does not warrant, its being accepted, given the respondent/accused, making a feeble denial qua the scribing(s), of, amount(s) thereon, both in words and figures, and, also the signatures, existing thereon, all rather not holding authenticity. However, when he failed to, thereafter, move an appropriate application, before the learned trial Magistrate, for an opt opinion being elicited, from the handwriting expert concerned, thereupon, a conclusion, is begotton, qua a) not only his authentic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
