KUMAR PRABHAKAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

(2.) This Special Leave to Appeal, under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has been filed on behalf of the appellant, seeking leave to file appeal against the Judgment and Order dated 29.10.2018 passed in Sessions Trial No.1578 of 2009, arising out of Complaint Case No.3413(C) of 2006, whereby and whereunder the Additional Sessions Judge-VII, Patna, acquitted the respondent no.2 of the charges framed against him for the offence under Sections 406, 409 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 138 of the N.I. Act.

(3.) The facts leading to this Special Leave to Appeal is that the complainant/appellant, namely, Kumar Prabhakar, filed Complaint Case No.3413(C) of 2006 against the respondent no.2, namely, Ranjan Kumar Gupta alias Munna and one Sanjay Kumar Gupta alias Sanju with the contention that he was in business relation with Sanjay Kumar Gupta alias Sanju and the respondent no.2, namely, Ranjan Kumar Gupta alias Munna. In the first week of the month of January 2006, both came to his house and made request to him to give cash Rs.75,00,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five Lacs) for distributing the same amongst the brokers of Madhya Pradesh, Rajsthan, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar as advance so that they may supply the seeds of wheat and mustered in low price. On their much persuasion and request and also to promote the business, he gave Rs.67,00,000/- to Sanjay Kumar Gupta alias Sanju and the respondent no.2, namely, Ranjan Kumar Gupta alias Munna,in presence of the witnesses, namely, Rajeev Ranjan (P.W.1) and Amit Kishore (P.W.2) and both put their signatures on the Revenue Stamp for receiving the aforesaid amount in presence of the witnesses (P.W.1 Rajeev Ranjan and P.W.2 Amit Kishore). In the month of May, 2006, when he visited Madhya Pradesh, Rajsthan, Uttar Pradesh and Bihar in connection with his business for purchasing the seeds of wheat and mustered, then came to know that no advance payment was made to the brokers. Thereafter, he was surprised and met Sanjay Kumar Gupta alias Sanju and the respondent no.2, namely, Ranjan Kumar Gupta alias Munna, who admitted their guilt and assured him to return Rs.67,00,000/- within a month but they did not return the aforesaid amount. On much persuasion and request made by him to them, Sanjay Kumar Gupta alias Sanju issued cheque of Rs.67,00,000/- of the H.D.F.C. Bank, Rajendra Ram Plaza, Exhibition Road Branch, Patna, in his favour in presence of the respondent no.2, namely, Ranjan Kumar Gupta alias Munna, with the assurance that the cheque would be encashed after its presentation in the Bank after one month. After one month, he presented the said cheque in his Bank Account for its encashment but, after sometime, he received information from the Bank that the said cheque has become dishonoured due to insufficient fund in the account. After receiving information about dishonouring of the cheque by the Bank, he sent legal notice to Sanjay Kumar Gupta alias Sanju and the respondent no.2, namely, Ranjan Kumar Gupta alias Munna through Advocate on 07.10.2006 but the notice returned unserved with the endorsement that both have left their houses. Thereafter, on 22.10.2016, Sanjay Kumar Gupta alias Sanju and the respondent no.2, namely, Ranjan Kumar Gupta alias Munna, approached him and made request to him to give time for ten days to return the aforesaid money but in spite of passing over considerable time, the money was not returned by them to him.