HANUMAN PRASAD DIDWANIA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal on special leave has been filed under Section 378 (4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the complainant against the Judgment and order dated 20.6.1986, whereby the Learned Sub- divisional Judicial Magistrate, Patna City, has acquitted the accused Bishun Pd. Agrawal, opposite party No. 2 in the special leave application (To be hereinafter referred to as 'the respondent') of the offence punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code in Complaint Case No. 33 of 1980, Trial No. 554 of 1986.

(2.) The case had been initiated on the basis of a complaint filed by the appellant, Hanuman Pd. Didwania on February 12, 1980 before the Sub- divisional Judicial Magistrate, Patna City and he had alleged therein that the accused-respondent had come to the shop of the complainant situated at Jhauganj, Police Station-Chowk, District- Patna at 12 noon on 20.7.1977 and made a request that he was in urgent need of Rs.93,00/-, without which his prestige may be spoiled and the appellant on assurance given by Respondent that he would pay back the money within a week, handed over the amount of Rs. 93,00/- to the respondent. The respondent did not pay back the money as promised and later when the appellant approached him, the respondent issued a cheque of Rs. 93,00/- on 27.10.1977 drawn on the Central Bank of India; but when the appellant deposited the cheque for encashment to the Bank, the cheque was returned uncashed as there was no outstanding amount to the credit of the respondent in the Bank. According to the further case made out in the complaint, the complainant approached the respondent and produced before him dishonoured cheque and made demand for payment of his money; but the respondent did not exceed to the request and eventually made a refusal to pay back the amount, whereafter on 12.2.1980 the complaint was filed.

(3.) The respondent when put on trial denied the allegation and had taken a defence that there were some transactions between him and the appellant, and in settlement of some account he had issued a post dated cheque, which was to be presented before the Central Bank within specified period but the same was not done and the case was filed by the appellant.