LAWS(P&H)-2015-11-406

NIRVAIR SINGH BAKSHI Vs. RAVI KUMAR

Decided On November 16, 2015
Nirvair Singh Bakshi Appellant
V/S
RAVI KUMAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present criminal revision petition, at the hands of complainant, is directed against the impugned judgment dated 12.09.2013 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, whereby appeal of the petitioner was dismissed, upholding the impugned judgment of acquittal dated 05.04.2011, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Jalandhar.

(2.) Brief facts of the case, as recorded by learned Additional Sessions Judge in para 5 to 7 of the impugned judgment, are that the petitioner filed a complaint against the respondent for an offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments ('N.I. Act' for short). It was alleged in the complaint that the respondent was known to the complainant for the last many years. They had friendly and cordial relations with each other. The respondent took an amount of Rs. 4,00,000/- from the complainant for sale of his shops but later on, he did not fulfil his promise. So, the complainant asked him repeatedly to execute the sale deed in his favour but with no effect. Ultimately, he entered into an agreement on 12.08.2005 with the complainant, vide which he gave a post-dated cheque No.368817 dated 12.10.2012, drawn on HDFC Bank, Jalandhar of Rs. 4,00,000/-. It was ensured by him that cheque would be encashed as and when presented in the Court and he would not stop the payment or cancel the cheque. It was further stated that the petitioner presented the cheque to his bank i.e. UCO Bank for encashment but the cheque was returned unpaid vide memo dated 25.10.2010 with the remarks "Account Closed". So, the complainant demanded the payment of the dishonoured cheque through registered legal notice dated 05.11.2007 from the respondent and also approached him for the said purpose, who assured to make the payment but he failed to do so. Hence, the complaint was filed.

(3.) After considering the preliminary evidence led by the complainant, the learned trial Court summoned the accused to face criminal trial for the offence under Section 138 of N.I. Act. On appearance of the accused-respondent before the learned trial Court, notice of accusation was served upon him for the offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I. Act. In pre-charge evidence, complainant himself appeared as CW1, besides producing other documentary evidence.