CHANDRAKANT POPATLAL VAGHELA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Shailesh Desai, learned advocate for the applicant - original complainant and Mr. Vizoda, learned advocate for the respondent no.2- original accused.

(2.) This application is filed under Sec. 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking leave against the judgment and order of acquittal dtd. 26/9/2022 passed by the learned 2 nd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhuj in Criminal Case No.1712 of 2016, whereby, the learned Judge has recorded acquittal of respondent no.2- original accused for the offence punishable under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

(3.) Learned advocate for the applicant- original complainant has invited attention of this Court to the reasons recorded by the learned trial Court while recording order of acquittal. He has invited attention of this Court to the cross examination of the complainant and has also relied upon the further statement of the accused recorded under Sec. 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. By referring to the aforesaid evidence, he has submitted that the learned Magistrate has committed gross error in doubting the financial capacity of the complainant in absence of production of income tax return. He has further submitted that it has come on record that his annual income is around Rs.3.00 lakhs. The attention of this Court is also invited to the fact that only defence which was raised by the accused in the form of 313 statement is about misused of cheque. However, no defence has been raised by the respondent-accused by giving reply to the statutory notice under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Mr. Desai has also relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tedhi Singh vs. Narayan Dass Mahant reported in (2022) 6 SCC 735.