Madras High Court
A.Gulab vs A.Tasneem Banu on 6 June, 2025
Author: D.Bharatha Chakravarthy
Bench: D.Bharatha Chakravarthy
Crl.A.No.658 of 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 06.06.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
Crl.A.No.658 of 2012
A.Gulab ...Appellant
Vs.
A.Tasneem Banu ...Respondent
PRAYER: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 378(4) of Criminal
Procedure Code, to set aside the order of acquittal passed by the Judicial
Magistrate, (Fast Track Court), Vellore District in C.C.No. 183 of 2011 dated
30.07.2012, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, (Fast Track Court), Vellore
District and convict the respondent and order for the payment of maximum
compensation to the appellant herein under Section 357 of Cr.P.C.
For Appellant : Mr.M.Ganesh
Legal Aid Counsel
For Respondent : Mr.E.Kannadasan
ORDER
This appeal is filed against the judgment dated 30.07.2012 made in
C.C.No. 183 of 2011, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate (Fast Track
Court), Vellore. By the said judgment, the trial Court acquitted the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/06/2025 08:29:27 pm )
respondent of an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments
Act, 1881.
2. The case of the complainant is that the respondent/accused borrowed
a sum of Rs.90,000/- and executed a promissory note in favour of the
complainant, agreeing to repay the same with interest at the rate of 24% per
annum on 06.04.2010. In repayment thereof, the accused issued three cheques
on 09.10.2010. Upon presentation of the said cheques for collection, they
were returned dishonoured and after issuance of a legal notice on 23.10.2010,
a private complaint was filed.
3. Mr. M.Ganesh, the learned Legal Aid Counsel appearing on behalf of
the appellant, would submit that this is a clear and categorical case where the
accused borrowed the money, executed the promissory note, and issued the
cheques. The cheques were returned dishonoured for insufficient funds. The
signatures in the promissory note as well as on the cheques are not denied.
The presumption is in favour of the complainant. The trial Court erroneously
acquitted the accused on the ground that the complainant did not prove the
source of funds and did not produce the accounts or other relevant documents.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/06/2025 08:29:27 pm )
4. The learned Legal Aid Counsel submits that none of the findings of
the trial Court are sustainable. He further submits that the finding of the trial
Court that there is no documentary evidence is incorrect, since Ex.P1, the
promissory note, is already marked. The second finding of the trial Court, that
there are ambiguities and contradictions in the evidence of the complainant, is
also incorrect. The complainant has given clear and cogent evidence. Further
finding that different inks were used in filling up the promissory note is
concerned, the complainant has deposed that it was the accused who executed
and handed over the note. Therefore, he submits that when the signatures on
the promissory note and cheques are not disputed, the finding of acquittal is
unwarranted.
5. Per contra, Mr.E.Kannadasan, the learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the respondent submits that the trial Court has considered the
detailed cross-examination of the complainant and has extracted the
discrepancies in the evidence of the complainant in paragraph 4 of the
judgment, and thereafter arrived at its finding. Therefore, no grounds exist to
upturn the finding of acquittal.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/06/2025 08:29:27 pm )
6. I have considered the rival submissions made on either side and
perused the material records of the case.
7. It can be seen that the case of the complainant is that he advanced the
loan in cash for which Ex.P1 promissory note was executed. In cross
examination, the complainant admitted that he is a money lender and is
running a finance business. However, he deposed that the instant transaction
alone was at a personal level and hence, no records were maintained. In the
same breath, he stated that for the interest paid, he had been maintaining
receipt books. When further questioned as to why he did not produce the said
receipts, he reverted to his earlier statement that he was not maintaining any
records. The same is taken into account.
8. Secondly, when it is the case of the complainant that he is in the
professional finance business, his statement that the loan was advanced on a
particular date and that it was to be repaid with 24% interest per annum, and
that he paid the entire amount without deducting the interest is noted. Further,
when it is stated that six months' interest were paid subsequently, the receipts
which is allegedly with the complainant were not produced.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/06/2025 08:29:27 pm )
9. Coupled with the same, when D.W.1 was examined on behalf of the
accused to state that the document was filled by a particular advocate clerk,
and when the trial Court considered the evidence as a whole and though not
given the finding expressly, it can be seen that it has broadly considered the
fact that the accused had rebutted the presumption through the cross-
examination of the complainant and by leading contra evidence in the form of
D.W.1. As such, though every finding of the trial Court cannot be sustained,
the ultimate conclusion of acquitting the accused cannot be said to be perverse
so as to warrant interference in an appeal against acquittal.
10. Accordingly, finding no merit, the Criminal Appeal stands
dismissed. No costs.
06.06.2025
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
nsl
Note: Since the Court has appointed Mr.M.Ganesh, the
learned Legal Aid Counsel to assist the Court. The Tamil
Nadu Legal Services Authority, High Court, Chennai is
requested to pay the fee for the learned Legal Aid Counsel as
per the rules.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/06/2025 08:29:27 pm )
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
nsl
To
1. The Judicial Magistrate,
(Fast Track Court),
Vellore District.
2. The Tamil Nadu Legal Services Authority,
High Court, Chennai.
06.06.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/06/2025 08:29:27 pm )
