VIJAY KUMAR GUPTA Vs. BIJENDER KUMAR PANWAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FEELING aggrieved by the acquittal order passed in favour of the respondent in CC No. 480/1 filed by the appellant before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, present appeal has been preferred under Section 378(4) r/w Section 482 Cr.P.C.

(2.) COMPLAINT under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") was filed by the appellant against the respondent, inter alia, on the allegations that the respondent took a loan of Rs.3,45,000/ - with interest @ 18% per annum from the appellant on 15th January, 2006 for his daughter's marriage with the promise that he would return the loan amount within two years. At that time the respondent issued various post dated cheques. Cheque No. 525360 amounting to Rs.12000/ - dated 26th April, 2008 drawn on Central Bank of India towards partial discharge of his liability was dishonoured upon presentation with the remarks "funds insufficient". A legal notice was served upon the respondent calling upon him to make the payments. However, on failure to pay the amount, the complaint was filed. By the impugned judgment dated 23rd August, 2011, learned ACJ -cum - ARC, North West Rohini referred to the provision of Section 138 and 139 of the Act and observed that these Sections lay down the consequences of dishonour of cheque and further lay down certain principles on the basis of which the liability of the drawer are to be ascertained. These essential principles were enumerated as: -

(3.) IT was submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the Trial Court fell in grave error by relying upon the certified copies of the evidence and the judgment led in another case. The order suffers from material irregularities and, as such, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. He further submitted that out of eleven cases filed by the appellant/complainant, respondent has been convicted in nine cases.