Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Aparesh Kumar Singh, Ratnaker Bhengra, JJ.
Sanjay Kumar Jain, S/o Shri Rajkumar Jain – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand & Ors. – Opposite Parties
Cr.M.P. No. 1238 of 2015
Decided On : 09-04-2018
Negotiable Instruments Act – Sections 138, 139 – Issuance of Cheque – Cheque Bounce – Petitioner seeks special leave to appeal against the impugned judgment, passed in Complaint Case, by the learned court of Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Ranchi, whereunder, the accused persons/opposite party nos. 2 and 3 have been acquitted of the charges under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. – Held, Court have considered the submissions of the parties in detail – In the facts and circumstances and materials on record, discussed above, court is of the considered view that the accused/private opposite parties, herein, had, on the basis of their own exhibits, statements and the exhibits of the complainant, such as, debtors ledger and the tax invoices-cum-challans, shown that parties were in cash and credit transaction during the said period. – From the debtors ledger, Exhibit-6, it is also evident that the transactions between the parties all throughout were in cash, except on the particular date of the cheque number 034193 for a sum of Rs.6,13,675/-. – The complainant had not adduced any tax invoice cum challan showing the outstanding liability on the accused of the said amount as legally enforceable debt. – Court is therefore of the view that the learned trial court had sufficient reasons to render a finding of acquittal. –Court, therefore, do not find any ground made out on the part of the petitioner for grant of special leave to appeal. – Instant Petition Dismissed.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Petitioner seeks special leave to appeal against the impugned judgment dated 08.05.2015, passed in Complaint Case No. 2480 of 2009/T.R. No. 143 of 2015, by the learned court of Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Ranchi, whereunder, the accused persons/opposite party nos. 2 and 3 have been acquitted of the charges under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
3. As per the case of the complainant, accused had purchased Nokia Mobile Handsets from the complainant and paid price by issuing cheque of Rs. 6,13,675/- dated 23.09.2009, drawn on State Bank of India, S.N. Ganguly Road, Main Road, Ranchi Branch. On being presented, the cheque was returned with the memo ‘debit to an NPA A/c’. On 06.10.2009, complainant sent legal notice to the accused on his residential address demanding payment within 15 days from the date of the receipt of the notice, but, after receipt of the notice also, the amount remained unpaid. Therefore, the case was filed.
4. After solemn affirmation of the complainant and on enquiry, on the basis of a prima facie case being made out, summons were issued on the accused persons on 23.11.2009. Pursuant to that, they appeared on 07.09.2010. Substance of accusation was explained to them on 10.01.2011 to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
5. During the trial, complainant examined himself as C.W. 1 and one other person C.W. 2 who claimed to be one of the Directors of Computer Network. Complainant adduced the following documentary evidence as Exhibits:-
“Exhibit 1 Cheque no. 034193 dated 23/09/2009;
Exhibit 2 Cheque return memo dated 24/9/2009;
Exhibit 3 Legal Notice dated 6/10/2009;
Exhibit 4 Postal Receipt;
Exhibit 5 Acknowledgment;
Exhibit 6 Debtors ledger;
Exhibit 7 to 7/4 Tax invoice cum challan dated 30.6.09 of Computer Network;
Exhibit 7/5 & 7/6 Tax invoice cum challan dated 29.6.09 of Computer Network.”
6. Defence had examined three witnesses including accused no. 1 as D.W. 3 and also adduced the following documentary evidence in his defence:-
“Exhibit A, A/1, A/2, A/3 & A/4 Cheque issuing slip foil for Mobile Dot Com;
Exhibit B Tax invoice cum challan dated 29.6.09 of Computer Network;
Exhibit B/1 Money receipt dated 29.6.2009 of Rs. 96,700/- issued by Computer Network;
Exhibit C Tax invoice cum challan dated 30.6.2009 of Computer Network;
Exhibit C/1 Money receipt dated 1.7.09 of Rs. 1,37,600/- issued by Computer Network;
Exhibit C/2 Money receipt dated 6.7.09 of Rs. 1,30,000/- issued by Computer Network;
Exhibit C/3 Money receipt dated 8.7.09 of Rs.1,20,000/- issued by Computer Network;
Exhibit C/4 Money receipt dated 6.7.09 of Rs.1,28,000/- issued by Computer Network;
Exhibit D to D/20 unused cheque leaf Sr. No. 34220 to 34240 of Mobile Dot Com.”
On conclusion of the complainant’s witnesses, statement of the accused was recorded under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on 05.04.2014. He pleaded that there are no evidence against him.
Complainant in his deposition supported the case set up in the complaint petition. He adduced the cheque bearing no. 034193 of Rs. 6,13,675/- dated 23.09.2009; return memo of the bank dated 24.09.2009; Legal notice dated 06.10.2009, Exhibit-3; Postal receipt, Exhibit-4; acknowledgment, Exhibit-5. He also adduced the Debtors ledger as Exhibit-6. Exhibit-7 to 7/4 are Tax Invoice cum challan dated 30th June, 2009 of Computer Network and Exhibit-7/5 & 7/6 are Tax invoice cum challan dated 29.06.2009 of Computer Network.
7. The complainant had adduced the ledger of the accused for the period from 1st April,2009 to 31st March, 2010 ( Exhibit-6); two tax invoice cum challan of Computer Network dated 30.06.2009 ( Exhibit 7 to 7/4) and dated 29.06.2009 ( Exhibit 7/5 & 7/6) respectively, in support of his case that the accused had purchased Nokia Mobile Handsets for a sum of Rs. 6,30,305/- to which few amount was given in cash and for remaining amount of Rs. 6,13,675/-, the cheque was issued. He claimed to be Director of th
SupremeToday
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
