RAJEEV SHARMA Vs. SANJEEV KUMAR JAIN AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Having regard to the nature of order this court proposes to pass in the instant proceedings, it is not necessary to give facts in detail, save and except that the appellant-complainant (hereinafter, 'complainant') filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Una, District Una, Himachal Pradesh, against respondent-accused, which came to be registered as Case No. 299-1-2004 RBT No. 38-II-2012, alleging therein that he alongwith accused had been running a cable network business in Una town in the name and style of Shubh Cable Network, but since there was some financial dispute inter se partners, complainant as well as respondent entered into a written agreement dated 3.7.2004. As per agreement, respondent-accused handed over two cheques to the complainant bearing No. 972294 dated 3.7.2004 and No. 972295 post-dated 17.7.2004 for Rs. 9.5 Lakh each, however, fact remains that on presentation both the aforesaid cheques were dishonoured and returned vide memo dated 20.11.2004 with the remarks that payment of cheques has been stopped by the accused. After having received aforesaid memo from the Bank concerned, complainant served upon respondentaccused a legal notice vide registered post on 23.11.2004, calling upon him to make payment good. Respondentaccused failed to make payment and as such, complainant was compelled to initiate proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Una, District Una, Himachal Pradesh. Respondent-accused took defence before the court below that signatures on the cheques in question were obtained by the complainant on gun point and as such, court below vide judgment dated 2.1.2013, acquitted the respondent-accused of the charges framed against him.

(2.) Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment of acquittal passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Una, complainant preferred an appeal bearing No. 02 of 2013 in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge(I), Una, District Una, Himachal Pradesh, under Sections 372 and 374 CrPC, however, the fact remains that same was dismissed being not maintainable, because, against order of acquittal, complainant ought to have filed appeal under Section 378(4) CrPC in this Court. In the aforesaid background, complainant has approached this Court, in the instant proceedings, seeking therein conviction of respondent-accused after setting aside judgment of acquittal recorded by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Una.

(3.) During proceedings of the case at hand, complainant filed an application under Section 311 read with Section 482 CrPC being CrMP No. 296 of 2018, seeking therein permission to place on record, judgment dated 18.10.2017 titled State of Himachal Pradesh vs. Rajeev Sharma, case RBT No. 150-II-16/05 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Una, District Una, Himachal Pradesh, whereby court below held present complainant Rajeev Sharma not guilty of having committed offences punishable under Sections 148, 452, 386, 324, 506 read with Section 149 IPC in FIR No. 771/04 dated 7.11.2004 registered at Police Station, Una, District Una, Himachal Pradesh and acquitted him of the aforesaid charges framed against him. Judgment dated 18.10.2017 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 1, Una, further reveals that FIR No. 771/04 dated 17.11.2004 came to be registered by Police Station, Una, District Una, Himachal Pradesh at the behest of respondent-accused namely Sanjeev Kumar Jain, who had alleged that present complainant had procured his signatures on cheques detailed herein above on gun point. Police, after completion of investigation, presented Challan in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Una, Himachal Pradesh, wherein complainant was charged with offences punishable under Sections 148, 452, 324, 506 read with Section 149 IPC, however, as has been noticed herein above, subsequently, learned Court below, on the basis of material adduced on record by respective parties, held present complainant Rajeev Sharma not guilty of having committed offences under aforesaid Sections and arrived at a definite conclusion that "evidence adduced on record by defence i.e. present complainant goes to show that respondent-accused had cooked up a story with regard to accused obtaining his signatures on stamp papers/agreement and cheques of Rs. 19.00 Lakh on gun/revolver/knife point solely with a view to escape the liability of consequence of cheques of Rs. 19.00 Lakh and agreement dated 7.2004 executed in favour of accused." (para-22 of judgment dated 18.10.2017, passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Una).