An appellate court will not overturn an acquittal unless the trial court's judgment is unreasonable or perverse, maintaining the presumption of innocence.

JUDGMENT :

(Jasjit Singh Bedi, J.)

CRM-1882-2019

For the reasons stated in application, same is allowed. Delay of 290 days in filing the application for leave to appeal is condoned.

CRM-1886-2019

This is an application under Section 391 Cr.P.C. for leading additional evidence.

The learned counsel for the applicant contends that the respondent-accused had admitted her liability of Rs.6 lacs on 07.11.2015 in the presence of the independent witnesses. The pronote had been handed over to the counsel for the applicant-complainant in March 2016 itself but on account of the negligence of the counsel, the said document was never produced in evidence before the Trial Court. It was only pursuant to the acquittal of the accused did the applicant-complainant come to know that the pronote had never been exhibited in the Court. He, therefore, contends that the application under Section 391 Cr.P.C. be allowed for leading additional evidence with respect to the pronote.

The learned counsel for the respondent-accused, on the other hand, contends that the pronote referred to dated 07.11.2015 was never produced before the Trial Court at any stage prior to the passing of the impugned judgment. In fact, the complainant himself had never referred to the same during his pre-charge evidence or after-charge evidence. Therefore, the said document could not be brought on record now, at this stage, by way of the instant application.

We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

Admittedly, the document which is sought to be brought on record is a pronote purportedly written by the respondent-accused admitting her liability of Rs.6 lacs on 07.11.2015. However, a perusal of the record would reveal that the said document was never referred to by the applicant complainant in his statement recorded during the course of the Trial. The judgment itself is silent with respect to any such document being adverted to. It is not disputed by either party that the said document was not mentioned by the applicant-complainant during his pre-charge or after charge evidence which were admittedly recorded after 07.11.2015.

In this view of the matter, the application has only been moved to fulfil a lacuna in the case of the complainant and therefore, the same stands dismissed.

CRM-A-263-2019

The present application under Section 378 (4) of Cr.P.C. has been filed for grant of leave to appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 20.12.2017 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Gohana.

2. The complaint was filed by the complainant against the accused with the allegations that one Sunil son of Krishan Sharma had come in contact with the complainant several years ago and had been working on his tractor Agency Panthal at Sonepat road Gohana. A close relationship had developed amongst the complainant and Sunil Sharma. Initially, the said Sunil Sharma had been getting timely financial help from the complainant and had been repaying the same which strengthened their relation. In the year 2010, Sunil introduced the accused to the complainant who was having family relation with the family of Sunil and, thus, she had been coming off and on to the residence of the complainant and friendly relations developed between the wife of the complainant and the accused. Hence, the accused contacted the wife of the complainant in December 2012 and requested to provide aid of Rs. 6 lacs and that too on interest to be repaid within one year alongwith interest @ of 1% p.m. against execution of a pronote and receipt The complainant taking into consideration the family relationship between them agreed to it. It was promised by the accused that her husband was working in the University and after completion of the house, she would pay the said amount alongwith interest just after one year. However, she failed to repay the same. The complainant contacted the accused at her residence in December 2013 and requested for repayment of his dues. In response to the visit of the complainant the accused al