PRADEEP KUMAR JHA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an acquittal appeal. In this case leave to file an appeal has been granted by a Division Bench of this court vide order dated 3.9.2008 passed in Cr M.P.(D.B.) 170 of 2008.

(2.) THE prosecution case as appeared from the written complaint filed by the complainant/appellant against the respondent No. 2 in brief is that the complainant was well known with the respondent no. 2 and they had business' relationship between them. They were working together but after some time relationship between them derteriorated and litigation started between them at Ghatshila Court bearing No.. C/1 -28/96. On intervention of the friends and the relatives, both the parties compromised the case outside the court and it was decided that the accused respondent no. 2 will pay to the complainant a sum of Rs. 3,50,000/ - (Three Lakhs Fifty thousand) and the complainant will not take interest or proceed in the case. According to the compromise, accused Baldeo Singh issued a cheque of Rs. 3,50,000/ - (Three Lakhs Fifty thousand) on 2.5.2005, bearing No. 112627 Central Bank of India, Jamshedpur. When the complainant presented the aforesaid cheque for encashment through his Bankers i.e. Bank of Baroda, Golmuri Branch, Jamshedpur, the Bankers of accused the Central Bank of India, Jamshedpur, dishonoured the aforesaid cheque issued by the accused vide cheque Return Memo dated 3.5.2005 showing 'insufficient fund' of the accused. After receipt of the aforesaid information from the Bank, the complainant informed the same to the accused but the accused requested him to present the said cheque once again on or after 15.5.2005. Accordingly, the complainant presented the said cheque on 16.5.2005 but this time too the Bankers of the accused dishonoured the said cheque stating therein "insufficient fund vide Cheque Return Memo dated 20.5.2005. This information was delivered to the complainant on 30.5.2005.

(3.) AFTER trial, the Judicial Magistrate considering the argument of the parties and considering the oral and documentary evidences, convicted the. accused respondent no. 2 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for six months coupled with payment of compensation of Rs. 80,000/ - (Eighty thousands) to the complainant in terms of provision stipulated under Section 357(3) of the Cr.P.C. The accused Respondent No. 2 challenged the said conviction and sentence by filing an appeal i.e. Criminal Appeal No. 110 of 2007 before the Sessions Judge. The appellate court considering the case allowed the said appeal and acquitted the accused appellant from the charge under Section 138 of the N.I. Act.