ORAL ORDER

1. By way of present Revision Applications preferred under the provision of section 397 of Code of Criminal Procedure, the applicants – original complainant challenges the order dated 06.07.2020 passed in Criminal Appeal No.27 of 2019 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Halol and restore the judgment of Criminal Case No.2138 of 2015 dated 19.09.2019 and order dated 06.07.2020 passed in Criminal Appeal No.26 of 2019 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Halol and restore the judgment of Criminal Case No.2139 of 2015 dated 19.09.2019, whereby, the private respondent was convicted for the offence punishable under section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act (for short “the N.I.Act”).

2. Brief facts leading to the present Revision Applications can be stated thus :-

2.1. The applicants are doing agricultural activity and both the applicants were farming land and as per family arrangement, they were doing agriculture activity on the said land. According to the applicants, respondent no.2 herein was in the business of buying and selling the land and wanted to buy applicants’ land and made offer of Rs.21 lakhs to the present applicants. According to the applicants, respondent no.2 prepared all the documents and paid money in installment, but for final installment, respondent no.2 gave two cheques worth Rs.3 lakhs each in the name of the applicants. According to the applicants, both the cheques were issued by respondent no.2 on the date of sale deed which was registered on 01.06.2015. After receipt of cheques, sale deed was registered and executed before the Sub Registrar. Upon presentation of cheques, same were returned by the bank with remarks ‘insufficient funds’ and therefore, the applicants issued notice to respondent no.2 on 17.07.2015 and as respondent no.2 failed to honour the demand notice, criminal cases came to be filed before the competent Court under section 138 of the Act.

3. The learned Trial Court convicted respondent no.2 and sentenced for one and half year simple imprisonment with fine of Rs.4,50,000/- and ordered respondent no.2 to undergo six months more imprisonment, in case of default to pay fine. But, the learned Appeal Court reversed the judgment and order of learned Trial Court and therefore, present revisions.

4. Learned advocate Mr. Kaash Thakkar appearing for the applicants – original complainant took the Court through findings and observations recorded by the Courts below and would submit that price of land was Rs.21 lakhs, but as one of the original complainant was illiterate, she did know what amount was written in the sale deed. According to the applicants, sale consideration mentioned in the sale deed was Rs.1,80,000/- and it was paid, but as the applicant lady was illiterate, she was not aware about the amount mentioned in the sale deed, but in fact the land was agreed to be purchased by respondent no.2 at Rs.21 lakhs and for final installment, respondent no.2 issued cheque of Rs.3 lakhs to each applicant, but same were dishonored.

5. Sale deed was produced by respondent no.2 at Exh.51 and Exh.49 before the learned Trial Court. It is a matter of fact that sale consideration was mentioned at Rs.1,80,000/- in both the sale deeds. The sale deed is never challenged by the applicants either before the Civil Court or Criminal Court, more particularly on the ground of insufficient consideration being shown in the sale deed.

6. Having heard submissions made at bar, it is quite clear and admitted position that the applicants received sale consideration as mentioned in the sale deed in full. It was specific case of respondent no.2 that cheques were not issued for any legally enforceable debt. In that circumstances, the applicants – original complainant are required to establish that cheques were issued towards remaining payment of sale consideration. The learned Appeal Court in para 12 and 13 has specifically found and observed that sale deed was silent as to issuance of any cheques on the date of execution of s