GIAN CHAND SINGAL Vs. PUNEET GAUTAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is directed against the judgment dtd. 31/12/2012, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Solan, District Solan, H.P. (learned Trial Court) vide which the respondent (accused before the learned trial court) was acquitted of the commission of an offence punishable under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (NI Act). (Parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience.)

(2.) Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the complainant filed a complaint against the accused before the learned Trial Court for the commission of an offence punishable under Sec. 138 of the NI Act. It was asserted that the accused was dealing in the business of the sale and supply of surgical and other items. He used to borrow money from the complainant to augment his business. He assured the complainant that he would set up an industry at Baddi in partnership with the complainant. The complainant later on found that the accused was facing financial difficulties, hence, he requested the accused to return the borrowed amount. The accused issued a cheque of 6,50,000/- drawn at HDFC Bank Ltd on 7/5/2010 to discharge his liability. The complainant presented the cheque to his bank, but it was returned with the endorsement 'funds insufficient'. The complainant issued a legal notice to the accused asking him to repay the amount. The notice was served upon the accused on 18/5/2010. The accused failed to repay the amount and sent a reply to the notice on 4/6/2010 denying the contents of the notice and claiming that blank signed cheques were taken by the complainant as security. This plea was false as no blank signed cheque was obtained by the complainant from the accused. Hence, it was prayed that an action be taken against the accused as per the law.

(3.) The learned Trial Court found sufficient reasons to summon the accused. When the accused appeared, a notice of accusation was put to him for the commission of an offence punishable under Sec. 138 of the NI Act, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.