9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (8) TMI 527X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s that learned Trial Court committed an error in acquitting the accused. The accused has not denied his signature on alleged cheque Ex. P/1, therefore, presumption u/s. 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was available that cheque was issued for legally recoverable debt or liability. Learned Trial Court instead of raising legal presumption in favour of the complainant shifted burden of proof on the complainant. The complainant and the accused were well acquainted with each other, therefore, complainant has advanced loan of Rs. 8,00,000/- from the fund of retiral benefits of his father, to the accused for his personal need. Learned Trial Court committed an error in appreciation of evidence and circumstances of the case. The bank ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... v. Gobardhan, AIR 2013 SUPREME COURT 3033, following broad principles may be culled out:- (1). The appellate Court has full power to review, reappreciate and reconsider the evidence etc. (2). The code of Criminal Procedure 1973 puts no limitation, restriction or condition on the exercise of such power and an appellate Court on the evidence before it may reach its own conclusion both on the questions of fact or of law. (3). The reversal of the acquittal can be made only if the conclusions recorded by the learned trial Court do not reflect a possible view. "Possible view" denotes a conclusion which can reasonably be arrived at regardless of the fact whether it is agreed upon or not by the higher Court. (4) The court should interfere o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... os. 12 and 13 of the judgment on critical examination of evidence on record doubted avalability of Rs. 8,00,000/- with complainant Pramod Chauhan as also factum of advancment of loan to the accused. Learned Trial Court relying on judgments" Rev. Mother Marykutty Vs. Reni C. Kottaram (2013) 1 SCC 327, Kamla S. Vs. Vidhyadharan M.J and another (2007) 5 SCC 264, Vijay Vs. Laxman 2013 (3) Crimes 246 (SC), Basalingappa v. Mudibasappa AIR 2019 SC 1983, K. Subramani Vs. K. Damodara Naidu 2015 Bankmann (SC) 231 and Pavish Shukla Vs. Pankaj Sharma 2019 Lawsuit (MP) 43" held that the accused was successful in rebutting presumption u/s. 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Learned Trial Court in para 20 of the judgment on evaluation of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
