PURANLAL PESHWANI Vs. KU. RESHU KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this acquittal appeal filed under Sec. 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "Cr.P.C."), appellant has challenged the legality and propriety of the judgment dtd. 31/1/2017 passed by the First Additional Judge to the Court of First Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur, Chhattisgarh (hereinafter referred to as "First Appellate Court") in Criminal Appeal No.172 of 2015 allowing the appeal and setting aside the judgment dtd. 10/9/2015 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur, Chhattisgarh (hereinafter referred to as "Trial Court") in Criminal Complaint Case No.38 of 2013, whereby the Trial Court has convicted the accused Ku. Reshu Kaur for the offence punishable under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as "N.I. Act") and sentenced her to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay compensation of Rs.3,00,000.00 (Three Lac rupees), in default of payment of compensation, she would further undergo additional imprisonment for 6 months.

(2.) Brief facts for disposal of instant acquittal appeal, are that, accused Ku. Reshu Kaur had taken a loan of Rs.3,00,000.00(Three Lac rupees) from complainant Puran Lal Peshwani on 30/9/2011 and executed promissory note vide Ex.P/1. She had issued cheque bearing No.000004 dtd. 30/10/2012 (Ex.P/2) for payment of said amount, which the complainant deposited in his bank account. Thereafter, he was informed through Bank memo (Ex.P/3) dtd. 2/11/2012 that said cheque was not remunerated due to insufficient funds in accused's account. Upon said information, on 9/11/2012, complainant sent legal notice (Ex.P/4) to accused by registered post through his Advocate demanding cheque amount, postal receipt of which is annexed as Ex.P/5. But, neither mail returned nor any report was came, then information regarding said post was sought from Chief Post Master vide Ex.P/6, upon which, information of Ex.P/7 and Ex.P/8 was sent in envelope (Ex.P/9) by the Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Raipur Division, Raipur, in which, it was stated that notice was delivered to given address on 17/11/2012. When accused did not pay the amount within 15 days of service, complainant filed a complaint on 7/12/2012 under Sec. 138 of the N.I. Act.

(3.) After the accused denied the charge, complainant got himself examined and exhibited 9 documents (Ex.P/1 to Ex.P/9). The statement of accused was recorded under Sec. 313 of the Cr.P.C., in which, she denied the circumstances appearing against her and pleaded innocence and false implication in the case. She has only stated that she had given a cheque as security. No evidence has been presented in defence by the accused.