SUMIT DEB Vs. JOY DEB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Bhowmik, learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as Mr. Sumit Debnath, learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State-respondent No.2 and Mr. Biplab Debnath, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1.

(2.) The instant appeal arises from the judgment dtd. 29/1/2020 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agartala, West Tripura, in connection with case No.NI 83 of 2015 wherein the accused-respondent had been acquitted from the charges levelled against him under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 (here-in-after referred to as "the NI Act") and dismissed the application filed by the complainant-appellant.

(3.) A brief recapitulation of the facts of the instant case is necessary. The complainant-appellant was a professional contractor, whereas, the accused-respondent No.1 was the owner of one mixture plant situated at Bodhjungnagar. According to the complainant, both the complainant-appellant and the accused-respondent no.1 were known to each other for their business transactions. In the month of November, 2014, the complainant supplied stone chips to the accused amounting to Rs.5,00,000.00(Rupees five lakhs) only on credit with the assurance of repayment of the same. Thereafter, the accused issued one cheque bearing No.001738 dtd. 1/1/2015 for an amount of Rs.5,00,000.00(Rupees five lakhs) of the Union Bank of India, Ganaraj Chowmuhani, Agartala Branch. The complainant-appellant presented the cheque bearing No.001738 dtd. 1/1/2015 amounting to Rs.5,00,000.00 with the banker, and the same was returned back through a memorandum dtd. 1/1/2015 as "payment stopped by drawer'. Accordingly, the cheque dtd. 1/1/2015 issued by the accused became dishonoured. Thereafter, the complainant issued a demand notice dtd. 20/1/2015 to the accused-respondent No.1 for payment of the said amount of money, but, despite service of the legal notice, the accused failed to make the payment of the said amount to the complainant within 15 days of the receipt of the said notice, resulting to filing of the present complaint case under Sec. 138 of the NI Act against the accused-respondent no-1 herein.