JUDGMENT

Vinod S. Bhardwaj, J. (Oral) - The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant-complainant aggrieved of the judgment dated 10.10.2017 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Sangrur, in Complaint No.156 dated 01.04.2016 titled Tarsem Chand Vs. Manjit Kaur Vashisht.

2. Briefly summarized the facts of the case are as under:-

1. The complaint was registered on the allegations by the complainant that the accused has borrowed a sum of Rs.1,55,000/- from the complainant in cash in the month of July 2015 as the accused was in dire need of money. The accused to discharge her legal liability, issued cheque No.138377 dated 10.2.2016 for Rs.1,55,000/- drawn on Axix Bank, branch Sangrur, from her account no.915010021867503 to the complainant. On presentation of the said cheque for encashment, the same was dishonoured and returned with the remarks 'Fund Insufficient' vide memo dated 11.02.2016. Thereafter, the complainant issued a legal notice dated 15.02.2016 , but the accused failed to clear the account of the complainant.

2. After going through the complaint and affidavit on record, produced by the complainant, the accused was ordered to be summoned to face trial under Section 138 of the Act.

3. To prove its case, the complainant himself stepped into the witness box as CW1 and tendered into evidence his duly sworn affidavit Ex.CW1/A as part of his examination in chief, wherein he deposed on the lines of the complaint. He further proved the original cheque Ex.C1, memo dated 11.2.2016 Ex.C2, legal notice Ex.C3 and postal receipt Ex.C4.

4. The accused was examined under Section 313 Code of Criminal Procedure, wherein all the incriminating circumstances appearing against the accused were put to her. She denied all the allegations leveled against her and pleaded that she is innocent. She had good relations with the complainant being neighbourer for the last many years. In the month of May 2015, the complainant had borrowed as sum of Rs.4,00,000/- from her as he was in dire need of money for personal purpose and she in good faith had given the said amount to the complainant on 27.5.2015 after arranging the same from reliable sources. At that time, the complainant promised her that he will repay the said amount within three months. After expiry of three months, she demanded back the said amount from the complainant and then complainant deposited the amount of Rs.2,45,000/- out of Rs.4,00,000/- in his account bearing No.915010021867503. When she asked for the remaining amount of Rs.1,55,000/-from the complainant then he put of the matter on one pretext or the other and in the month of January 2016, complainant showed his inability to repay the remaining amount and further told her that if she was in dire need of money then he could arrange a loan of Rs.1,55,000/- for her from some private money lender. At that time complainant had also obtained three bank cheques along with other necessary documents in good faith from her for the purpose of obtaining the loan from some private money lender. Complainant has intentionally deceived her by misusing one cheque out of the three cheques, which was given to the complainant by her for the purpose of arranging the loan. Neither the complainant has arranged the loan for her nor he returned the blank cheques along with other documents given to her.

5. In defence evidence, the accused tendered into evidence application dated 30.3.2016 Ex.D2, postal stamp dated 30.3.2016 Ex.D3, her statement dated 02.5.2016 Ex.D4, inquiry report dated 06.5.2016 Ex.D5, reply of legal notice dated 25.2.2016 Ex.D6, postal receipt Ex.D7, certified copy of complaint titled as Tarsem Chand Vs. Nirbhai Singh Ex.D8, certified copy of complaint titled as Tarsem Chand Vs. Manjit Kaur as Ex.D9, copy of bank statement account mark A, certified copy of complaint titled as Tarsem Chand Vs. Jagdish Parsad Ex.D10, certified copy of complaint titled as Baldev Singh Vs. Tarsem Chand Ex.D11 and certified copy of FIR Ex.D2."

3. On co