LAWS(HPH)-2021-3-29

DAYALU RAM Vs. SUNIL CHAUHAN

Decided On March 06, 2021
Dayalu Ram Appellant
V/S
Sunil Chauhan Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent/accused, through the impugned verdict, made by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Rajgarh, upon, criminal case No. 98/3 of 2007, became acquitted, for a notice of accusation, drawn for an offence, punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, whereupon the complainant becomes constrained, to institute thereagainst the instant appeal, before this Court, for therethrough, his striving to seek its annulment.

(2.) The dishonoured negotiable instrument, is, embodied in Ext. CW1/A, and, an amount, of, Rs. 2,40,000/-, is, carried therein. Un-controvertedly, for want of sufficient funds, existing in the bank(s) concerned, hence in contemporaniety, vis-A-vis, vis-A-vis, its presentation therebefore, by the complainant, it become dishonored, (i) whereupon the complainant became constrained, to, issue a statutory notice, upon the respondent/accused, statutory notice whereof, is, comprised in Ext. CW1/D. Since, within the time prescribed therein, the respondent/accused, failed to liquidate, to, the complainant, the amount, echoed therein, (ii) thereupon, the complainant, became constrained, to, lodge a complaint, before the learned Judicial Magistrate concerned.

(3.) This Court, would become constrained to invalidate the impugned verdict, of, acquittal, recorded, qua the accused/respondent, upon, emergence, on record, of, forthright, and, candid evidence, hence personificatory, vis-A-vis, therethrough, the, statutory presumption(s), as embodied in Section 139, of, the Negotiable Instrument Act, provisions whereof stand extracted hereinafter: