T.Yogeshwar Goud, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh,
2022 Latest Caselaw 5779 Tel

              HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

               CRIMINAL APPEAL No.867 of 2010
JUDGMENT:

1. The appellant, who is the complainant aggrieved by the

judgment in C.C No.267 of 2008 dated 07.05.2010 passed by

the XVI Additional Judge-cum-XX Additional Chief

Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, acquitting the accused

for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable

Instruments Act, filed the present appeal.

2. The complainant filed a private complaint against the

accused alleging that he has lent an amount of Rs.2,75,000/-

for developing his establishment M/s.Alekhya Visions on

03.03.2004. However, when requested, a cheque for

Rs.50,000/- dated 31.01.2005 towards part payment was

issued. When the same was presented for clearance, it was

returned for the reason of 'account closed.' A legal notice was

issued on 20.07.2005, which was received by the accused, but

failed to repay the amount, as such, complaint was filed.

3. The complainant examined himself as P.W.1 and marked

Exs.P1 to P15. The accused entered into witness box and

examined himself as D.W.1 and also another witness as

D.W.2.

4. Learned Magistrate having considered the evidence on

record, found that the accused was not guilty for the following

reasons; i) The accused filed Ex.D1, which is an amount of

Rs.50,000/- paid by way of banker's cheque to the

complainant, which is to discharge the cheque amount; ii)

there is a sale transaction in between the complainant and the

accused in the year 1998 and it is not believable that payment

of Rs.50,000/- was made in the year 2006 towards the said

property transaction of the year 1998, as stated during the

complainant's examination in the court.

5. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that the

Magistrate had committed an error in acquitting the accused

when the cheque in question was admitted. In order to prove

that there was an outstanding of Rs.2,75,000/- the four

other cheques issued by accused were also marked as Exs.P6

to P9, given on different dates, that itself would go to show

that there was an outstanding. In the said circumstances,

acquittal has to be reversed.

6. As seen from the evidence, there was a bankers cheque,

which was dated 25.02.2006, which was given to the

complainant. Except stating that the said amount was towards

some other transaction, the complainant failed to prove what

was the transaction, for which the said amount was taken. If

at all the said Rs.50,000/- was towards sale transaction of the

year 1998, the said explanation given by the complainant is

not believable. For the reason of the complainant failing to

prove that the amount of Rs.50,000/- which was paid on

25.02.2006 nearly 25 days after the cheque was issued under

Ex.P1 was for any other purpose, the logical conclusion is that

the payment was to discharge the amount covered by the

cheque Ex.P1, which is dated 31.01.2005. It is not

understandable as to why the four other cheques were filed in

the present case, without sending them for clearance.

7. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhakrishna

Nagesh v. State of Andhra Pradesh1 held that under the Indian

criminal jurisprudence, the accused has two fundamental

protections available to him in a criminal trial or investigation.

Firstly, he is presumed to be innocent till proved guilty and

secondly that he is entitled to a fair trial and investigation.

Both these facets attain even greater significance where the

accused has a judgment of acquittal in his favour. A judgment

of acquittal enhances the presumption of innocence of the

accused and in some cases, it may even indicate a false

implication. But then, this has to be established on record of

the Court.

8. There are no grounds to interfere with the judgment of

the learned Magistrate. For the reasons discussed in the

preceding paras, the appeal fails and the same is dismissed.

__________________ K.SURENDER, J Date: 11.11.2022 kvs

(2013) 11 supreme court Cases 688

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

CRIMINAL APPEAL No.867 of 2010

Date: 11.11.2022.

kvs