HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
SVP
AKSHAY MOHITBHAI SHAH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
ORDER :
(S.V. PINTO, J.)
1. The present application is filed by the applicant - original complainant under Section 419(4) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking leave to appeal against the order dated 30.09.2024 passed by the learned 29th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmedabad acquitting the respondent No. 2 - accused in Criminal Case No. 30344 of 2017 filed by the applicant for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881.
1.1 The respondent is hereinafter referred to as “ the accused” as he stood in the original case for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity. 2. The brief facts culled out from the memo of the present appeal as well as the record and proceedings are as under:-
2.1 The applicant had given an amount Rs.1,14,00,000/- to the respondent No. 2 towards which, forty two cheques of the amounts of Rs.2,00,000/- and Rs.4,00,000/- were issued by the respondent No. 2 from her account with Corporation Bank, Shahibaug Cross Roads Branch, Ahmedabad. The respondent No. 2 and the applicant had also entered into agreement to sale for four flats of Raj Labdhi Heritage being Flat Nos. E/104, E/204, E/203 and E/201 situated at Gandhi
The trial court's acquittal was based on improper appreciation of evidence regarding the nature of the transaction, warranting leave to appeal.
The trial court's failure to properly appreciate evidence warrants reconsideration of the acquittal under Section 138 of the NI Act.
The trial Court's dismissal of a cheque dishonor case due to non-prosecution was erroneous as it failed to appreciate the evidence, warranting leave to appeal.
The court emphasized the necessity for proper appreciation of evidence in business transactions under the Negotiable Instrument Act, leading to the granting of leave to appeal against acquittal.
The trial court's acquittal was unjustified due to improper appreciation of evidence and failure to challenge party involvement, warranting leave to appeal.
The court emphasized the necessity for proper evaluation of evidence in cases involving acquittal under the Negotiable Instrument Act.
The presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act must be drawn in favor of the holder of the cheque, and misinterpretation of evidence by the Trial Court warrants leave to appeal.
The court emphasized the necessity for proper appreciation of evidence and documents in cases involving cheque dishonor under Section 138 of the NI Act.
The court found that the Trial Court misapprehended the limitation issue regarding the debt, which was within the legally enforceable period, warranting the granting of leave to appeal.
The presumption under Section 139 of the NI Act favors the complainant, and the accused must rebut this presumption with credible evidence.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.