Order on Board

09.01.2025

1. Since Mr.Govind Dewangan, Advocate is representing accused /

respondent Vijay Kumar Gupta in Acquittal Appeal No.83/2019, Mr.Dewangan has also been heard in CRMP No.2267/2018 in which the said accussd is arrayed as respondent No.1.

2. Heard petitioner Sanjay Kumar Gupta in person. Also heard Mr.Govind Dewangan, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Vijay Kumar Gupta and Mr.U.K.S.Chandel, learned Deputy Advocate General appearing for the respondent-State.

3. Petitioner-Sanjay Kumar Gupta has filed CRMP No.2267/2018 with following prayers:-

“3.1 That, the petitioner above named and respectfully prays to this Hon’ble Court to call for entire record pertaining to Criminal Complaint Case no.387/2015 pending before the Jurisdictional Judicial Magistrate, Sitapur, District-Surguja (Chhattisgarh) for its kind perusal. 3.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside impugned order dated 22.9.2018 (Annexure-P/1)

and impugned order dated 5.9.2018 (Annexure-P/2).

3.3 That, the petitioner above named most respectfully prays to this Hon’ble Court to direct the learned trial Court to take cognizance of dishonor of two cheques bearing no.”334642” of Rs.2,00,000/- dated 31.07.2015 and cheque bearing no.”334643” of Rs.1,20,000/- dated 31.07.2015 as stated in the complaint case and consequently charge framed on 12.10.2015 (Annexure-P/5) against the respondent No.1 may be altered to that effect.”

4. Petitioner-Sanjay Kumar Gupta has filed Acquittal Appeal No.83/2019 with following prayers:-

“3.1 That, the appellant above named most respectfully prays to this Hon’ble Court to call for entire record pertaining to Nego case no.385/2015, decided by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sitapur, District – Surguja (Chhattisgarh) for its kind perusal.

3.2 That, the appellant above named most respectfully prays to this Hon’ble Court to allow this appeal and kindly be pleased to set aside the judgment of acquittal passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sitapur, District- Surguja (Chhattisgarh) dated 16/11/2018 in Nego Case no.385/2015 and accordingly convict the respondent for the offense committed under section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881, in the interest of justice and the appellant may be awarded with suitable compensation.”

5. Facts of the case are that in the year 2015 respondent-Vijay Kumar Gupta was caught under financial crunch, therefore, he borrowed Rs.4,30,000/- from the petitioner with an assurance to return the same after some time. After few months, respondent-Vijay Kumar Gupta gave three cheques to the petitioner with following details:-

i. Cheque No. Date Amount 334642 31.07.2015 Rs.2,00,000/-

ii. 334643 31.07.2015 Rs.1,20,000/- Iii. 334639 03.09.2015 Rs.1,10,000/-

6. After receiving the cheques the petitioner presented all three cheques at Batauli branch of State Bank of India on 3.9.2015, but the same returned to him with note that Drawer has “insufficient fund”. After receiving such information from the Bank the petitioner issued a legal notice to respondent-Vijay Kumar Gupta on 10.09.2015 which is statutory requirement under Section 138 (b) of the Act of 1881 and dishonor of cheques were informed to respondent-Vijay Kumar Gupta via notice and after waiting for statutory period, a complaint case was filed by the petitioner under Section 138 of the Act of 1881 before the jurisdictional Magistrate. In the complaint case, the petitioner has given details of each and every cheque with a copy of cheque and information supplied to him by the concerned bank. On a subsequent date, learned trial Court recorded the statement of the petitioner and the petitioner in his deposition has categorically mentioned about the issuance of three cheques, its dishonor and details of amount involved in the cheques. When the trial proceeded and the petitioner was asked to confine his case upto only one cheque bearing no.”334639’

of Rs.1,10,000/- dated 03.09.2015, it was matter of surprise for the peti