HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
SVP
PARTNER TO SWARAJ ALUMINUM PARTNERSHIP FIRM THRO MOHAMMAD AJAJ YUSUFBHAI SHAIKH – Appellant
Versus
SHYAM ENTERPRISE – Respondent
ORDER :
(S. V. PINTO, J.)
1. The present application is filed by the applicant – original complainant under Section 419 of Bharatiya Nagarik Surakhsha Sanhita, 2023 seeking leave to file an appeal against the judgement and order dated 12.12.2024 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Balasinor, District Mahisagar (hereinafter referred to as the “learned Trial Court”) in Criminal Case No. 1147/2022, whereby, the learned Trial Court was pleased to acquit the accused from the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to “the NI Act” for short).
2. Learned advocate Mr. Altaf Charkha for the applicant submits that the applicant and the respondent no. 2 had business transactions and the respondent no. 2 used to purchase aluminum from the applicant. When the accounts were drawn, an amount of Rs. 12,46,446.62/- was outstanding towards which cheque no. 000060 dated 18.05.2022 for Rs. 11 lakhs from the account of the respondent no. 2 with HDFC Bank, Chandlodiya Branch, Ahmedabad was given. The cheque was deposited by the applicant in his account with State Bank of India, Balasinor Branch but the cheque returned unpaid with the endorsemen
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 interpretation of Section 56 of the Negotiable Instrument Act must be correctly applied to determine the enforceability of a cheque, especially in light of prior payments.
The court emphasized the necessity for proper evaluation of evidence in cases involving acquittal under the Negotiable Instrument Act.
The court emphasized the necessity for the Trial Court to properly appreciate all evidence and documents, leading to the granting of leave to appeal against acquittal under Section 378(4) of the Code....
The trial court's failure to properly appreciate evidence warrants reconsideration of the acquittal 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.
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 found that the trial Court's failure to properly appreciate evidence justified granting leave to appeal against the acquittal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act.
The presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act must be drawn in favor of the holder unless rebutted, and misinterpretation of evidence by the Trial Court can lead to a successful....
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.