Back
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
SVP
SADHNABEN VASANTBHAI BALSHARAF – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
ORDER :
(S.V. PINTO, J.)
1. The present application is filed by the applicant - original complainant under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking leave to appeal against the order dated 24.09.2024 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmedabad acquitting the respondent No. 2 - accused in Criminal Case No. 53477 of 2017 filed by the applicant for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881.
1.1 The respondent No. 2 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 alleged that she had given Rs. 1,75,000/- to respondent No. 2, out of which Rs. 50,000/- was taken from her mother, Ansuyaben Babulal Jagtap, and the remaining Rs. 1,25,000/- was from her personal savings. The respondent No. 2 issued cheque No. "212259" in favour of the applicant, which was deposited in Union Bank, Odhav, Ahmedabad, on 14.06.2017. The cheque was returned unpaid with the endorsement “Payment Stopped By Drawer.” A statutory demand
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 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 court emphasized the necessity for proper appreciation of evidence and documents in cases involving cheque dishonor under Section 138 of the NI Act.
The trial court's failure to properly appreciate evidence warrants reconsideration of the acquittal under Section 138 of the NI Act.
The statutory presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act must be applied in favor of the holder in due course unless effectively rebutted by the accused.
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....
The court emphasized the necessity for proper evaluation of evidence in cases involving acquittal under the Negotiable Instrument Act.
The trial court's acquittal was unjustified due to improper appreciation of evidence and failure to challenge party involvement, warranting leave to appeal.
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 trial court's failure to properly appreciate evidence led to the granting of leave to appeal against the acquittal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
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
