IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI

th

ON THE 17 OF FEBRUARY, 2026 CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1626 of 2016 GHANSHYAM Versus NANNU SINGH CHAWALIYA Appearance:

Shri Wakeel Khan - Advocate for appellant.

Shri Vijay Shukla - Advocate for respondent.

JUDGMENT This appeal under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed by the appellant - Ghanshyam (hereinafter referred to as the 'complainant') assailing the judgment and order of acquittal dated 07.07.2015 passed in Criminal Appeal No.102/2015 (Nannu Singh Chawaliya Vs. Ghanshyam) by learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Ashta, District Sehore (M.P.) whereby the lower appellate Court allowing the appeal has set aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 12.03.2015 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First class, Ashta, District Sehore, in Criminal Case No.1423/2012 whereby the respondent- Nannu Singh Chawaliya (hereinafter referred to as the 'accused') had been convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short the 'N.I. Act') and sentenced to undergo R.I. for six months and fine of Rs.3,67,000/-, in default of payment of fine, further imprisonment of one month.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent/accused being acquainted with the appellant/complainant borrowed a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- from the complainant to meet his personal needs. In discharge of the said liability, he is stated to have issued a cheque dated 18.06.2013 drawn on Account No.10729506303 maintained with State Bank of India, Ashta Branch. The said cheque was presented by the complainant for encashment in Vijaya Bank, Ashta Branch; however, the same was returned unpaid due to insufficiency of funds in the account of the accused. Thereafter, the complainant issued a notice to the respondent/accused through ordinary as well as registered post, intimating him about the dishonour of the cheque and calling upon him to make payment of the cheque amount within the stipulated period. Despite receipt of the said notice, the respondent/accused neither replied thereto nor made payment of the amount in question. Consequently, the appellant/complainant instituted a complaint under Section

138 of the N.I. Act.

3. The learned trial Court framed charge against the respondent/accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. The respondent/accused denied the accusation and claimed trial. In his defence, he contended that he had neither borrowed any amount from the appellant/complainant nor issued the cheque in question towards repayment of any loan. He asserted that although the cheque bears his signature, but it had been handed over to his wife and was subsequently lost, about which intimation had also been given to the Bank. It was further alleged that the appellant/complainant had misused the said cheque and filed a false complaint against him.

4. The learned trial Court, upon appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence on record, rejected the defence set up by the respondent/accused and convicted him for the offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. The accused was sentenced to undergo R.I. for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.3,67,000/-, with a further sentence of one month’s R.I. in default of payment of fine.

5 . Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment of conviction recorded by the learned trial court, the accused preferred an appeal before the lower appellate Court. The learned lower appellate Court while allowing the appeal has set aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the learned trial Court/JMFC and eventually acquitted the respondent/accused of the offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. Hence, the present appeal has been filed by the complainant on various grounds.

6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant has pointed out that the learned trial Court/JMFC on appreciation of the evidence on record