YADAV MOHARSINGH PURANSINGH Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present acquittal Appeal has been filed by the appellant - original complainant, Yadav Moharsingh Puransingh under Section 384 of the Cr. P.C., against the Judgment and order dated 12.11.2014 rendered by the learned 6th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gandhinagar, in Criminal Case No.1644 of 2013. The said case was registered against the present respondentoriginal accused for the offences punishable under Section -138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881.

(2.) ACCORDING to the prosecution case, it is the case of the prosecution that there is a good friendship between the appellant and respondent -accused and the respondent -accused took the appellant -complainant on the tour and, since then they became good friends. It is further the case of the prosecution that being a good friend, the respondent -accused demanded money from the appellant on several occasions and the appellant gave the same on demand made by the respondent. Further, that total legal outstanding dues of Rs.1,00,000/ -which is required to be paid to the appellant by the respondent. The respondent -accused gave assurance by admitting the said dues of Rs.1,00,000/ -to pay the same. Thereafter, the respondent -accused gave one cheque of Rs.1,00,000/ -of Dena Bank, Chandkheda Brach being Cheque No.326447 dated 07.03.2013. The appellant deposited the said cheque in his account on 07.03.2013 and the same came to be returned back with an endorsement of insufficient fund and therefore, the appellant gave notice on 11.03.2013 through his advocate to the respondent. The notice was duly served and no reply was given by the respondent -accused nor any payment has been made. Thereafter, the appellant filed complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gandhinagar, which came to be numbered as Criminal Case No.1644 of 2013. Then, the appellant -complainant produced evidence through affidavit at Exh.21 and documentary evidence like dispute cheque at Exh.24, copy of slips of cheque deposited by the complainant at Exh.25, memo regarding the cheque returned at Exh.26 and 27, office copy of notice at Exh.28, receipt of the post at Exh.29 and acknowledgment slip at Exh.30.

(3.) THEREAFTER , after filing closing pursis at Exh.32 by the prosecution, further statement of accused person under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was recorded. The respondent -accused disclosed that the cheque was given to him for the security purpose for installment and the same was misused by the appellantcomplainant. Further, no notice was served to him and at Exh.38, he disclosed in detailed in written statement. The respondent -accused admitted that he was innocent and he was wrongly charge -sheeted by the complainant and he has denied the case of the prosecution and submitted that a false case is filed against him.