KHERA TRADING CO. Vs. GURU NANAK RICE MILLS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This instant appeal has been preferred by the appellantcomplainant against the judgment of acquittal dtd. 12/7/2001 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur in Criminal Appeal No.37 of 1999, vide which the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dtd. 17/11/1999 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Batala in Complaint Case No.215/1 of 5/10/1995 filed under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'N.I. Act'), was set aside.

(2.) Succinctly, the facts are that the respondent-firm through its sole proprietor Lakhbir Singh, issued two cheques bearing No.2188820 dtd. 25/5/1995 and 2188821 dtd. 25/6/1995, respectively, in favour of the appellant-firm for a sum of Rs.75,000.00 each drawn on J & K Bank Ltd., Batala in order to discharge a legal liability towards the payment of paddy purchased by the respondent from the appellant-firm. Upon presentation of the said cheques for encashment, the same were dishonoured and returned vide memo dtd. 11/9/1995 on account of insufficiency of funds. Then, a legal notice was served by the appellant on 16/9/1995 upon the respondent demanding payment of the said cheques amount, but the respondent failed to make such payment. The said notice was received undelivered with remarks 'addressee has refused to receive the registered letter'. Thereupon, the complaint (supra) was filed by the appellant against the respondent-firm. Consequently, a trial ensued and sole proprietor of the respondent-firm i.e. Lakhbir Singh was convicted and sentenced by learned trial Court to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year along with a fine of Rs.5,000.00 and in case of default of payment of fine, further rigorous imprisonment for three months. Aggrieved, the respondent-accused preferred an appeal against the said judgment of conviction, which was allowed by learned lower Appellate Court and consequently, the conviction and sentence of the respondent was set aside, thereby, acquitting him. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant-complainant has preferred the present appeal.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant, inter alia, contends that the learned lower Appellate Court has ignored the factual as well as the legal position, while acquitting the respondent on the ground that stipulated period of 15 days from the date of receipt of legal notice was not afforded to him before filing the complaint under Sec. 138 of N.I. Act as the registered notice was issued on 16/9/1995 and returned on 20/9/1995, whereas the complaint was rightly filed on 5/10/1995, i.e., after 15 days. He further submits that the cause of action arose, when the cheques in question were dishonoured and returned and the stipulated period of 15 days is to just give the accused another opportunity to right his wrong and escape punishment. It is further contended that even on merits, there is ample evidence on record to establish the guilt of the respondent, as he has duly admitted his signatures upon the cheques in question.