THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.454 OF 2008
JUDGMENT:
1. This Criminal Appeal is filed by the appellant/complainant aggrieved by the acquittal recorded by the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Special Mobile Court, Sangareddy, in C.C.No.300 of 2006 dated 24.12.2007, for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
2. The case of the appellant/complainant in the trial Court was that the appellant was running auto workshop and also selling spare parts. The accused offered to let out shop and the complainant agreed to take it on lease. Accordingly, a lease deed was executed between them. In terms of the lease agreement the complainant paid an amount of Rs.1 lakh through cheque and further an amount of Rs.1 lakh was given as refundable deposit. Subsequently, the accused requested to advance a sum of Rs.50,000/-as hand loan which was given by the complainant on 25.03.2004. The complainant's son established a spare parts shop, however, after two months since the business was not running, they wanted to close the shop and the lease deed was terminated. The accused issued a cheque of Rs.2,50,000/- which included the 2 refundable deposit of Rs.2 lakhs and the loan amount of Rs.50,000/-. However, the said cheque when presented for clearance was returned unpaid. Aggrieved by the same, complainant issued notice. Since the accused failed to pay the amount after receiving the notice, a complaint was lodged before the Court.
3. The learned Magistrate having examined witnesses PWs.1 to 4 and marking Exs.P1 to P8 found the respondent not guilty for the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act on the following grounds.
a) There was no legally enforceable liability on the respondent.
b) Presumption cannot be raised for the reason of the complainant failing to discharge his initial burden of proving that the cheque was issued towards debt.
c) The complainant failed to prove that an amount of Rs.50,000/- was given to the respondent/accused.
d) The transaction regarding the shop was in between the son of the complainant and the respondent/accused for which reason there cannot be any liability in favour of the complainant.
3
4. Learned Counsel for the appellant/complainant submits that the witnesses PWs.1 to 4 proved their case that the respondent/accused was due an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- and the trial Court erred in concluding that there was no contract between the appellant/complainant and the accused. He relied on the Judgment of Honourable Supreme Court in Rangappa v. Mohan1 wherein it was held that once the cheque relates to the account of the accused and signature is admitted, the initial burden has been discharged and the presumption is attracted. The burden shifts on to the accused to discharge his burden. Counsel submits that in the said circumstances, when the cheque and the signature are admitted by the accused, the Magistrate erred in finding that there was no legally enforceable debt.
5. The complainant's case is that the shop was taken on lease by the son of the complainant. Ex.P1 was executed by the accused in favour of the son the complainant. In the said circumstances, it is for the appellant/complainant to explain as to how the amount due if any is liable to be paid complainant. The finding of the learned Magistrate that the complainant failed to prove that there 1 (2010) 11 SCC 441 4 was no legally enforceable debt and also that the amount of Rs.50,000/- was also not proved, it cannot be said that the said findings are contrary to the evidence produced by the complainant.
6. The Honourable Supreme Court in cases of acquittal held that unless there are glaring inconsistencies and reasons which would prompt appellate Court to set aside the orders of acquittal, there shall be no interference. The view taken by the trial Court is reasonable on the basis of which acquittal is recorded.
7. In the said circumstances, the appeal fails and accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is dismissed.
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, shall stand closed.
_________________ K.SURENDER, J Date: 10.08.2022 tk 5 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER Crl.A.No.454 of 2008 Dated: 10.08.2022 tk