RAJINDER SINGH VERMA Vs. HAJI B K HANCHNMANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal, is, directed by the complainant/appellant herein, against, the verdict of acquittal pronounced by the learned trial court, upon, Cr. Case No.2593-3 of 2014/05.

(2.) The facts relevant to decide the instant case are that in September, 2004, the accused offered to purchase apple from the complainant, who readily agreed as the accused was offering a good rate. The accused assessed the gross, value of the apple crop at Rs.6,00,000/-, and, issued a post dated cheque No. 968127 of 1.10.2004, drawn on ICICI Bank, Shimla in favour of the complainant. The accused requested him to present this cheque for ecashment in December, 2004. The complainant contacted the accused on telephone before presentation of the cheque. The accused assured that the cheque would be cleared on its presentation. Accordingly, the complainant presented the cehque issued by the accused before the ICICI Bank, Shimla on 12.01.2015. The said bank informed the complainant that the cheque had been dishonoured due to "insufficient funds". The complainant immediately contacted the accused and intimated him about the dishonour of the cheque. The accused told the complainant that he would clear the payment very soon. However, he did not make the payment. The complainant sent a legal notice to the accused on 11.2.2005 by registered post, however, the accused failed to pay the cheque amount. Hence the complaint.

(3.) The learned trial Court, on, finding sufficient material on record, to proceed against the accused, hence, issued notice to the accused. On his appearance before the learned trial Court, notice of accusation for his committing an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, stood put to him. In proof of the case, the complainant examined himself as a witnesses. On conclusion of recording of the complainant's evidence, the statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, was recorded by the learned trial Court, wherein he claimed innocence and pleaded false implication.