SUNIL KUMAR BHAGAT Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant Criminal Revision is directed against judgment of acquittal dtd. 7/9/2015 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-12, Dhanbad in Criminal Appeal No. 78 of 2014, whereby and whereunder, the conviction and sentence of the opposite party No.2 passed by learned trial court for the offence under Sec. 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act has been reversed and set aside and appeal was allowed.

(2.) Factual matrix of the case is that the petitioner(complainant) entered into an agreement with the opposite party no.2, who was dealing with the business of plastic materials to supply quality goods and thereby advanced Rs.90,000.00 in the month of September, 2007 but the opposite party No.2 did not supply the materials as agreed between the parties and upon persistent demand of the advance money, the opposite party No.2 issued two cheques bearing No.310525 dtd. 7/12/2007 of Rs.45,000.00 and another cheque bearing No.310524 dtd. 18/10/2007 of Rs.45,000.00 respectively. It is further alleged that the complainant presented the said cheque bearing No.310525 which was returned with remark of "insufficient fund" by the banker under memo of notice dtd. 18/10/2007 and 7/12/2007 respectively. It is further alleged that the Branch Manager of ICICI Bank, Dhanbad instead of sending original cheque No.310524 and cheque return memo dtd. 18/10/2007, by mistake sent to the opposite party No.2, which was received by him. Subsequently, the Branch Manager issued duplicate cheque return memo dtd. 27/10/2007 in favour of the complainant. Hence, the complainant send legal notice through registered post with A/D demanding the cheque amount from opposite party No.2 dtd. 19/12/2007 but he did not reply to the notice nor paid the amount. Hence, the complaint was lodged.

(3.) Upon summons, the accused appeared and claimed to be tried. In order to substantiate his case, the complainant was examined as a witnesses(CW-1) and he has also adduced following documentary evidence:-