9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 1359X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... disclosure whatsoever as to when was the coal supplied, what was the quantity of the coal supplied, what was the amount received from the accused and what amount is unpaid. The complainant did not adduce any documentary evidence to show that he supplied coal to the accused, at any point in time. While the complainant asserted that the outstanding is reflected in the balance sheet, the balance sheet is not produced on record - in cases where the allegation is that certain goods were supplied and the cheque was issued towards payment of the consideration, it would be hazardous to convict only on the basis of the presumption under section 139 of the Act in the absence of any material, and which material ordinarily would be expected to be in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Maharashtra, Dharampeth Branch, dated 3.8.1999, bearing Number 082565, which was dishonoured for want of sufficient funds. The complainant issued notice, which was duly served, the accused did not make the payment within the statutorily prescribed period and an offence punishable under section 138 of the Act is committed. 4. The striking feature of the complaint is that every material particular is conspicuously missing. The complaint is blissfully vague. The complaint does not disclose when was the coal supplied, where was the delivery made, what was the quantity of coal supplied etc. The complainant stepped into the witness box and the affidavit in lieu of examination-in-chief is obviously as vague as the complaint. 5. In the cro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... prove that he was engaged in purchase and sale of coal. The learned Magistrate noted that the complainant was not in a position to disclose the quantity of coal allegedly supplied to the accused, or the amount paid by the accused and the balance due. The learned Magistrate noted that the complainant did not place on record any material to prove that there was a sale and purchase transaction pursuant to which the complainant supplied coal to the accused. The complainant found the defence of the accused, as is discernible from the cross-examination, probable and held that the complainant did not prove that the cheque was issued towards existing and enforceable debt. 7. The learned counsel for the complainant Mrs. Radhika Bajaj would submit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... esumption is rebuttable. The burden on the accused is to make out a probable defence. The accused need not step into the witness box or adduce direct evidence. It would suffice if the accused is in a position to create a reasonable doubt that the version of the complainant is false. In the factual matrix, the accused has more than succeeded in rebutting the presumption. 9. I have noted supra, that except a bald statement in the complaint that the disputed cheque was issued towards payment of unpaid amount, there is no disclosure whatsoever as to when was the coal supplied, what was the quantity of the coal supplied, what was the amount received from the accused and what amount is unpaid. The complainant did not adduce any documentary evi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
