HIRA SINGH Vs. UDI RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal, stands directed, against the impugned verdict, rendered by the learned Sessions, Judge, (Forest) Shimla, in Criminal Appeal No. 6-S/10 of 08/07, wherethrough, the afore, after setting aside the verdict, of, conviction, and, consequent therewith sentenced imposed, upon, the accused, hence by the learned trial Court, vis ? ?-vis, a charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, hence proceeded to pronounce, a verdict of acquittal, upon, the accused.

(2.) The appellant/accused, for discharging, his purported apposite liability hence issued, two, cheques, respectively on 25.1.2005, and, on 28.1.2005, to the respondent/complainant, and each cheque, carried, a, sum of, Rs. 25,000/-. The complainant presented, the afore cheques, at the bank concerned, and, upon their presentation therebefore, both were dishonored, hence, for want of sufficient funds, in, the accounts, of, the accused. The cheques were dishonored, on 30.5.2005, and, thereafter the complainant hence, filed, the, extant complaint. After the conclusion of the trial, the learned trial Court convicted, and, also sentenced, the accused, for a charge drawn under, Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, hence to, undergo simple imprisonment, for, six months, and, he also stood sentenced, to, pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/,- and, in case of default, of, making payment of fine amount, he stood sentenced, to, further undergo simple imprisonment for 45 days. Feeling aggrieved by the impugned judgment of conviction, and, sentence, the accused filed an appeal, before the learned first appellate Court, alleging, that the entire amount due against him, had been paid to the complainant, and, no amount was due from the accused. Regarding the issuance of cheques, the accused has admitted, the case, of, the complainant but according to him, the, entire amount due from him had already been paid, to, the complainant and, hence the cheques were demanded back, but, the complainant did not, on one pretext of the other, hence return the cheques.

(3.) On perusing the preliminary evidence, adduced by the complainant, the Court, of, the learned JMIC, Theog, District Shimla, took cognizance, against the accused, and, the accused was summoned. Notice of accusation was put to the accused, on 2.1.2006, qua commission of an offence, under, Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, whereto he pleaded, not guilty, and claimed trial. The complainant in support of his contention, examined himself, as, CW-1, and, also examined one Daya Rattan, as CW-2, and, one Vipin Kumar, as CW-3. After closure of complainant's evidence, the statement of the accused, was recorded, under Section 313 of Cr. P.C., wherein, the accused claimed innocence, and, pleaded false implication, in the case, and, thereafter examined, four witness, in defence.