SURESH BHAGWAN NIKAM Vs. DEEPAK KRISHANA JAGTAP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD both sides.

(2.) THIS is an application for leave to file appeal. The accused have been acquitted for committing offence under Section-138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. On perusal of the impugned Judgment of acquittal, it appears that the same is based on cogent and acceptable reasons. It is the case of the complainant that he had given two hand loans totaling Rs.55,000/-each. It was also his case that he was in possession of the vehicle and the same was also taken away by the accused and sold in the market for an amount of Rs.60,000/-. In his evidence the complainant had stated that in repayment, one installment of Rs.55,000/-was paid by cheque. When this cheque bounced a demand was made and the accused gave two cheques for an amount of Rs.25,000/-and Rs.30,000/-. Admittedly the said cheques were honoured. The complainant then stated that he demanded the balance amount of Rs.55,000/from the accused upon which the accused told him to redeposit the cheque. When this cheque bounced the proceedings were initiated by the complainant under Section 138 of the Act. From his own evidence, it is clear that two cheques of Rs.25,000/-and Rs.30,000/-were given by the accused only upon bouncing of the cheque of Rs.55,000/-. In this background, the court held that the demand was satisfied and he was no cause of action to issue show cause notice. The view taken by the trial court is possible view. Apart from this, it is seen that so far as purchase of vehicle is concerned, no document is produced to show that the same was belonging to the complainant. The complainant stated that before transfer of the vehicle, the same was sold by the accused. TTO forms are not produced before the court. Not a fit case to interfere in the impugned judgment. Hence, leave refused. Consequently the appeal papers to be filed.