Back
ARVIND KUMAR VERMA
Triloki Kumar Dheemar S/o Chatur Singh Dheemar – Appellant
Versus
Jai Prakash Batra S/o Hari Batra – Respondent
ORDER :
ARVIND KUMAR VERMA, J.
This Acquittal appeal under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “Cr.P.C.”) is filed by the appellant/complaint being aggrieved by the impugned judgment dated 05.02.2019 passed in Complaint Case No. 4345/2015 by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Durg, district Durg whereby the respondent/accused has been acquitted of the charges under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short “NI Act”).
2. Brief facts of the case are that the complainant/appellant and the accused/respondent are shopkeepers in the same market and are known to each other. In the year 2015, accused/respondent borrowed Rs. 2,50,000/- from the appellant for some personal work and he gave a cheque of Rs. 2,50,000/- to the complainant/appellant on 20.05.2015. It is alleged that thereafter when the appellant presented the cheque on 22.02.2015 in the bank, it was dishonored on account of insufficient balance. The appellant sent a legal notice on 04.06.2015 which was received by the accused/respondent but even after receiving the notice, he did not deposit or return the amount. It is alleged that the accused/respondent failed to pay the
The court upheld the trial court's acquittal, finding that the cheque was invalid due to material alteration, thus failing to establish charges under Section 138 of the NI Act.
Material alterations in a negotiable instrument void the instrument unless consented to by all parties involved.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the onus on the accused to raise a probable defense and the requirements for rebutting the presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instrume....
Material alterations to a negotiable instrument render it void unless consented by the parties; a court should not overturn an acquittal unless findings are unreasonable or perverse.
A dishonored cheque primarily for insufficient funds establishes liability under Section 138, while secondary reasons like signature discrepancies are irrelevant unless intent to defraud is proven.
The need for evidence to rebut the presumption under the NI Act and the inadmissibility of appreciating evidence at the stage of quashing proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
A cheque issued from an account not held by the issuer fails to satisfy the basic requirements under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, leading to acquittal.
In an appeal against acquittal, the appellate court may only interfere if the trial court's decision is perverse or illegal, reinforcing the presumption of innocence.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
