RAJ KISHAN Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Applicant-Raj Kishan has filed this application under Section 378(4), Cr. P. C. seeking permission for leave to appeal against respondents State of Haryana and Kiran Sapra, challenging the judgment dated 21.04.2015 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri, whereby accused-respondent was acquitted of the charges.

(2.) It is mainly stated in the application that accompanying appeal is likely to succeed on the grounds taken therein. It is further stated that learned JMIC, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri has failed to appreciate the evidence and has based the judgment of acquittal on conjectures and surmises. The settled law has been discarded while passing the impugned judgment, which is liable to be set aside. It is, therefore, prayed that leave to file the appeal be granted.

(3.) As per the record, the complainant Raj Kishan filed a complaint against accused Smt.Kiran Sapra and Smt.Jyoti under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. As per complainant's version, he was registered owner of vehicle bearing registration No.HR-38B-2924 and sold the same to accused No.2 Jyoti for a sum of Rs. 2,85,000/-vide agreement dated 27.06.2012. It is further the case of the complainant that accused No.2 paid Rs. 60,000/- to him in cash at the time of execution of agreement and possession was delivered to her along with RC on the same day. It is also the case of the complainant that accused No.2 agreed to pay a further sum of Rs. 18,000/- in cash to the complainant within a week and for remaining amount of Rs. 2,07,000/-, accused No.1 out of her free will and in discharge of existing liability of accused No.2 towards the complainant, issued a cheque bearing No.391146 dated 26.07.2012 upon understanding that when accused No.2 will pay the said amount in cash, the cheque in question will be returned back to accused No.1. On presentation of the cheque for encashment, it was returned with the remarks "insufficient funds". Legal notice was served upon the accused. When the amount was not paid, then the complaint was filed.