JUDGMENT

Jasjit Singh Bedi, J. - The applicant/appellant has filed the present application for grant of leave to appeal against the order of acquittal dated 28.01.2020 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Sri Muktsar Sahib, whereby the accusedrespondent has been acquitted of the charges under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the present complaint was filed by the complainant against the accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act with the allegations that the accused had taken a cash loan of Rs.90,000/- from him in the month of April, 2017 and in discharge of his legal liability had issued a post dated cheque bearing No.000043 dated 26.05.2017 drawn at HDFC Bank, Branch Grain Market, Sri Muktsar Sahib amounting to Rs.90,000/-. It was further submitted that the complainant having his account at Canara Bank, Branch Sri Muktsar Sahib presented the above said cheque for encashment on 26.05.2017 to his banker and then his banker sent the said cheque to the banker of the accused i.e. HDFC Bank, Branch New Grain Market, Sri Muktsar Sahib on the same date i.e. 26.05.2017 and the said banker returned the cheque in question being dishonoured along with memo dated 26.05.2017 with the remarks 'Funds Insufficient' to Canara Bank, Sri Muktsar Sahib and thereafter Canara Bank, Branch Sri Muktsar Sahib returned the said cheque along with covering letter dated 26.05.2017 to the complainant. It was further submitted that the complainant had given the above said amount to the accused out of his saving which he had kept at home made from his part time work and salary from his job. A legal notice dated 13.06.2017 was issued by the complainant through his advocate to the accused but the same was not received by the accused intentionally and the same was received back by the counsel of complainant, meaning thereby the accused was having full knowledge of notice. However, the accused did not make the payment of above said cheque to the complainant till the date, leading to the filing of the present complaint.

3. In preliminary evidence, the complainant examined himself as CW1 and thereafter the complainant closed his preliminary evidence. Finding sufficient ground against the accused, he was summoned to face trial for offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.

4. Finding a prima facie case for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the accused was served with a notice of accusation according to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

5. In his evidence, the complainant examined Sayad Rashid, Assistant Manager, Canara Bank, Branch, Sri Muktsar Sahib as CW1, Sagar Midda,Assistant Manager, HDFC, NGM, Branch Sri Muktsar Sahib as CW2, Hemant Sharma, Tax Assistant, Income Tax Office, Sri Muktsar Sahib as CW3, himself as CW4 and thereafter the complainant closed his evidence.

6. After the closure of the evidence of the complainant all the incriminating evidence was put to the accused, as required under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. The accused denied the allegations while stating that he had financial dealings with the C.C and Company which is owned by Raman Girdhar, who was carrying on the business of advancing loans to different persons and runs a chit fund. The accused further stated that he had taken a loan from C.C and Company in the year 2016-17 and had been making the payment and some of the receipts were with him. At the time of taking the loan from C.C and Company, the said company obtained 11 blank cheques bearing no.000036 to 000046. The cheque in question is one of those cheques which was blank at the time and was not filled in and was only signed. The accused further pleaded that he has not taken any loan from Ashok Kumar-complainant. Ashok Kumar was an employee of Girdhar Electronics Railway Road, Sri Muktsar Sahib, which is in the ownership of the family member of Raman Girdhar. Raman Girdhar is the owner of C.C and company. The