RAMBHAU TULSIRAM BHUSARI Vs. ASSANAND DHANUMAL VENSIANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this appeal after hearing the appellant, I have dictated the order on 27-09-2019 by sitting on the dais. At that time, I have decided to allow the appeal. However, prior to signing the order, another view of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Yogendra Pratap Singh vs Savitri Pandey and another, 2014 10 SCC 713 came to my notice.

(2.) So, I have brought it to the notice of learned Advocate for the appellant on 11-10-2019. Learned Advocate Shri Tiwari accepted his fault in not bringing it to my notice the ratio laid down in Yogendra's case (supra). According to him, it was due to oversight and it was unintentional. I have accepted it. Then Shri Tiwari argued the matter afresh and relied upon number of judgments. On this background, now I am dealing with the controversy on the basis of the latest view.

(3.) The appeal was filed in this Court on the background of acquitting the accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1882 (for short, 'N.I. Act'). The present appellant filed Criminal Complaint Case No.213/2006. The accused issued a cheque of Rs. 1 Lakh to the complainant towards the discharge of the liability arising out of a hand loan taken by the accused.