GUPTA MAHESHKUMAR KALIKAPRASAD Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application under the provisions of Sec. 378 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) is filed by the applicant - original complainant assailing the judgment and order dtd. 25/2/2022 passed in Criminal Case No. 5031 of 2008 by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Viramgam recording the acquittal from the offence punishable under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI Act).

(2.) Heard, learned advocate Mr. Nauman S. Qureshi for the applicant and learned advocate Mr. Piyush B. Trivedi for the respondent No. 2 as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent No. 1 - State.

(3.) The learned advocate for the applicant has mainly submitted that the learned Magistrate ought to have convicted the accused inasmuch as the cheque in question was duly signed by the respondent No. 2 and came to be dishonoured when presented before the bank with an endorsement "Fund Insufficient". Furthermore, in his submission, the learned Magistrate ought to have appreciated the fact that the cheque was issued for discharge of legal liability towards complainant. Further, it is submitted that the learned Magistrate ought to have appreciated the facts that the cheque in question was deposited in the bank in time; legal notice upon the respondent No. 2 was also issued within the stipulated time; the notice was replied and the signature of the respondent No. 2 on the cheque in question was not disputed; the cheque was returned unpaid with an endorsement "Fund Insufficient" and that, the respondent No. 2 had not arranged to repay the money within the notice period.