ORAL ORDER

1. By way of the present application, the applicant has prayed to grant leave to appeal against the judgment and order dated 24.09.2024 passed by the learned 3^rd Additional Sessions Judge, Gandhinagar (hereinafter referred to as “the learned Sessions Court”) in Criminal Appeal No. 86 of 2024.

2. Learned advocate Mr.H.M.Sevak for the applicant submits that the applicant and the respondent No.2 were known to each other and an amount of Rs.8,00,000/- was given by the applicant as the respondent No.2 had promised the applicant to give job to the sons of the applicant. That the jobs were not given to the sons of the applicant and hence, when the applicant demanded the amount, the respondent No.2 had given cheque No. 176569 dated 30.11.2021 for an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- and cheque No.176570 dated 05.12.2021 for an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- from his account with Bank of India, Nava Vadaj, Ahmedabad Branch. The said cheques were deposited by the applicant in his account with Bank of India, Mansa Branch and the same had returned unpaid with the endorsement “Payment Stopped by the Drawer”. The demand statutory notice was given by the applicant, which was duly served to the respondent No.2 and the respondent No.2 had given evasive reply and did not pay up the amount, and hence, the applicant filed a criminal complaint under Section 138 of the N.I.Act before the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Mansa, which culminated in Criminal Case No.1129 of 2021. The respondent No.2 was duly served with the summons and he appeared and after his plea was recorded, the entire evidence of the applicant was taken on record. The respondent No.2 stepped into the witness box and has also examined one witness on his behalf. After hearing the arguments of the learned advocate for the respective parties, the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Mansa was pleased to convict the respondent No. 2 for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I.Act by impugned judgment and order dated 21.02.2024 and sentenced him to simple imprisonment for six months and ordered the respondent No.2 to pay Rs.8,00,000/- as compensation to the applicant and in default, simple imprisonment of three months.

2.1. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and the order of conviction passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Mansa, the respondent No 2 filed Criminal Appeal No.86 of 2026 before the learned Sessions Court, Gandhinagar and after hearing the arguments of both the parties, the learned Sessions Court was pleased to quash and set aside the impugned judgment passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Mansa and acquit the respondent No.2 by the impugned judgment and order dated 24.09.2024. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant had proved the legally enforceable debt which was due from the respondent No.2, against which, the cheques in question were issued. During the cross- examination, it has come on record that an agreement was executed between the parties as also the fact that the amount was paid by the applicant after the fixed deposit was withdrawn but the learned Sessions Court did not consider this aspect and concluded that the presumption under Section 138 of the N.I.Act was successfully rebutted to the extent of prepondance of probabilities. The learned advocate submits that the applicant has a good case on merits and all the evidence produced by the applicant has been properly considered by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Mansa, and therefore, the present leave to appeal may be allowed.

3. Learned APP Ms. Jirga Jhaveri for the respondent No.1 – State submits that the learned Sessions Court has appreciated all the evidence in proper perspective and therefore, no interference of this Court is required in the impugned judgment and order of acquittal passed by the learned Sessions Court and the present application may be rejected.

4. Having heard advocates for the respec