BASANT KUMAR JAIN Vs. VISHVAMBHAR KHETAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainant Basant Kumar Jain has approached this Court by way of this appeal for assailing the judgment dated 02.01.2015 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate (First Class), No. 1, Udaipur City (North) in Criminal Case No. 1031/2010 whereby, learned trial Judge acquitted the respondent Vishvambhar Khetan from the charge under section 138 of the N.I. Act.

(2.) I have heard the arguments advanced by Shri Shaitan Singh, learned counsel representing the appellant and Shri Khet Singh, learned counsel representing the respondent and have gone through the impugned judgment as well as the record.

(3.) The appellant filed a complaint against the respondent in the year 2010 with the allegation that he and the accused were on good terms since long. Accordingly, looking to the needy condition of the accused and upon request made by him, the complainant advanced various sums of money to the accused at different points of time believing that the accused would return the same as and when demanded. The complainant started pressing the accused for returning the amount and finally upon persistent demands made by the complainant, the accused handed over a cheque No. 0251785 dated 25.12.2009 for a sum of Rs. 25,00,000/- to the complainant under his own signatures and assured that no sooner the same was presented in the bank, it would be honoured. The complainant presented the cheque in his bank from where, the same was returned with a remark that the bank account of the accused was closed. The complainant forwarded the statutory notice for demand of the cheque amount to the accused at his known residential address but the same was returned back with a note that the recipient was not found available despite repeated attempts. Thereafter, the complaint came to be filed in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate (First Class), No. 1, Udaipur City (North) who summoned the respondent to face trial. At the trial, the appellant complainant examined himself in evidence and exhibited six documents. The respondent denied the allegation of the complainant in his statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., 1973 and also himself appeared to give testimony in defence. The trial court, while deciding the matter, came to a conclusion that case set up by the complainant that he was on such close terms with the accused that a huge sum of Rs. 25,00,000/- was advanced to the accused without any receipt or without any security was prima facie unacceptable. Upon being cross-examined by the accused, the complainant stated that the accused came into touch with him in the year 2007 at village Sukher in connection with marble business. Thereafter, the various sums of money were advanced to the accused because he needed the same. He admitted that no entry was made of the amounts advanced to the accused in his books of accounts. He further admitted that he was an income-tax payee and he had disclosed the amounts advanced to the accused in the income-tax returns. Upon a pertinent question being put, the complainant admitted that he had not furnished the documents pertaining to his income tax returns in the court nor could he present the same. In reply to a pertinent question put on behalf of the accused, the complainant gave the following reply: ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMITTED]...