Gujarat High Court
Parakramsinh Mahipatsinh Zala vs State Of Gujarat on 20 August, 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/10355/2024 ORDER DATED: 20/08/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATIONNO. 10355 of 2024
(FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL)
In
F/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 19142 of 2024
================================================================
PARAKRAMSINH MAHIPATSINH ZALA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
================================================================
Appearance:
MR.SANAT B PANDYA(6976) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS C.M.SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO
Date : 20/08/2024
ORAL ORDER
1. The applicant - original complainant has filed the present Leave to Appeal being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the judgment and order dated 26.04.2024 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Limbdi in Criminal Case No.38 of 2018 filed by the applicant under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, wherein, the learned Trial Court was pleased to acquit the respondent No.2 - original accused. The parties are hereinafter referred to as 'the accused' and 'the complainant' as they stood in the original case, for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity. Page 1 of 22 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Tue Sep 10 2024 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 13 21:06:34 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/10355/2024 ORDER DATED: 20/08/2024 undefined 2 The brief facts that emerge from the record and the arguments of the learned advocate for the applicant - original complainant are as under:
2.1 The complainant filed Criminal Case No.38 of 2018 against the accused stating that he is doing farming and is a retired employee of Gujarat Agro Industries Corporation, originally residing at village Sauka, Taluka Limbdi, District Surendranagar and presently residing at Alka Park Society, Vastrapur Railway Crossing Road, Jivraj Park, Ahmedabad.
The accused was working in Reliance Communication, Ahmedabad and was doing the business of selling and buying imported mobiles and was a friend of Hirendrasinh Zala, the nephew of the complainant. The complainant had come in contact with the accused through his nephew Hirendrasinh Zala and as the accused wanted to expand his business and required finance in October 2017, the accused took an amount of Rs.11,60,700/- from the complainant and stated that the amount would be returned within three months. That the complainant gave the amount in the Page 2 of 22 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Tue Sep 10 2024 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 13 21:06:34 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/10355/2024 ORDER DATED: 20/08/2024 undefined presence of his nephew, Hiterndrasinh Zala, and as the accused did not return the amount within three months, the complainant demanded the amount and the accused gave Cheque No.018975 of Rs.11,60,700/- of ICICI Bank, Chandlodiya Branch, Ahmedabad dated 12.02.2018 of his Account No.182801502671. The complainant deposited the cheque in Bank of India, Limbdi Branch in his Account No.313510110001037 on 12.02.2018 and on 19.02.2018, the said cheque returned unpaid with endorsement "Account Closed". The complainant contacted the accused and told him that the cheque had returned unpaid as the account was closed, but the accused did not give any satisfactory reply and the complainant sent a statutory notice through his advocate by R.P.A.D on 06.03.2018, but the notice returned with the endorsement that the owner had refused to accept it and the envelope of R.P.A.D. returned to the advocate on 14.03.2018. As the accused did not return the amount, a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was filed before the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Page 3 of 22 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Tue Sep 10 2024 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 13 21:06:34 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/10355/2024 ORDER DATED: 20/08/2024 undefined Magistrate, Surendranagar, Limbdi and the case was registered as Criminal Case No. 38 of 2018. 2.2 The accused was duly served with the summons and the accused appeared before the learned Trial Court and the plea of the accused was recorded at Exh.7 wherein the accused denied all the allegations made in the complaint and the evidence of the complainant was taken on record. The complainant filed the following oral and documentary evidence in support of his case.
ORAL EVIDENCE :
Sr.No. Particulars Exh. 1 Prakramsinh Mahipatsinh Zala 21 2 Pankil Kalpeshbhai Parikh 43 3 Sahil Nehalchand Gupta 60 4 Mahammadbhai Ahmedbhai Mirza 68 5 Radheshyam Haridasbhai Sadhu 72 DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE : Sr.No. Particulars Exh. 1 Cheque No. 018975 17 2 Return Memo regarding the cheque 18 3 Legal Notice sent to the accused 19 4 Notice returned by the accused 20 5 Scanned copy of form for opening the account 44 Page 4 of 22 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Tue Sep 10 2024 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 13 21:06:34 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/10355/2024 ORDER DATED: 20/08/2024 undefined 6 Computerized ledger copy of the account of the 45 accused 7 Application for closing the account 46 8 Extract of accused's account from 24.01.2018 to 61 01.08.2018
2.3. The complainant filed the closing pursis at Exh.77 and the further statement of the accused under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was recorded, wherein, the accused refused to step into the witness box or to examine witnesses and denied all the evidence produced by the complainant and produced the following documentary evidence in support of his case.
DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE :
Sr.No. Particulars Exh.
1 Application of Hirendrasinh Zala to Police 86
Inspector, Anandnagar Police Station, Ahmedabad. 2 Letter of Police Sub Inspector, Anandnagar, 87 Ahmedabad to Police Inspector, Anandnagar Police Station, Ahmedabad.
3 Agreement to sell Hyundai Car No. GJ-1-RL-9431 88 purchased by the accused from Hirendrasinh Zala. 4 Statement of Hirendrasinh Zala before the Police 89 Sub Inspector, Anandnagar, Ahmedabad 5 Statement of the accused before Police Sub 90 Inspector, Anandnagar, Ahmedabad 6 Letter of PSI, Chandkheda Police Station to Police 91 Inspector, Chandkheda Police Station.
Page 5 of 22 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Tue Sep 10 2024 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 13 21:06:34 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/10355/2024 ORDER DATED: 20/08/2024 undefined 7 Letter of PSI, Chandkheda Police Station to the 92 Police Inspector, Anandnagar Police Station. 8 Notice issued by the accused to the complainant's 93 nephew with regard to the sale of car.
9 Reply given by the accused to the notice. 9410 Certified copy of application made by the 95 complainant's nephew against the accused before the Chandkheda Police Station.
11 Statement of the accused taken by the Chandkheda 96 Police Station on 23.08.2018 with regard to the complainant's nephew.
2.4 The accused filed the closing pursis at Exh.98 and after the arguments of the learned advocate for the complainant and the learned advocate for the accused were heard, by the impugned judgment and order dated 26.04.2024, the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Surendranagar, Limbdi was pleased to acquit the accused under Section 255(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure from the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act.
3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with impugned judgment and order, the applicant has filed the present Leave to Appeal mainly stating that the cheque given by the accused has been returned with the endorsement of "Account Closed" and the statutory notice was sent by the Page 6 of 22 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Tue Sep 10 2024 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 13 21:06:34 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/10355/2024 ORDER DATED: 20/08/2024 undefined complainant. That the accused did not reply to the statutory notice and has not returned the amount and the complainant has produced oral and documentary evidence and has successfully established that the cheque in question was issued from the bank account of the accused maintained by him. That the cheque was signed by the accused and was deposited in the bank of the complainant, but the learned Trial Court has not appreciated that once the accused had drawn a cheque in favour of the complainant, the complainant was the holder in due course and there is a statutory presumption that the cheque is issued in discharge of legal debt. Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act presumes that unless the contrary is proved, the learned Trial Court has to presume that the cheque has been issued for a legal debt, but the learned Trial Court has not considered the same and has not appreciated Section 118 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, which are the presumptions of Negotiable Instruments. That the complainant could recover the legal dues and the learned Trial Court has taken a hyper-technical approach and even though there are Page 7 of 22 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Tue Sep 10 2024 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 13 21:06:34 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/10355/2024 ORDER DATED: 20/08/2024 undefined contradictions, but the learned Trial Court has not appreciated that cash is not involved and the ingredients of the offence are clearly made out. That the impugned judgment and order deserves to be quashed and set aside, and hence, the present Leave to Appeal must be allowed.
4. Learned advocate Mr. Sanat D. Pandya for the applicant and perused the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Trial Court in Criminal Case No.38 of 2018 and all the documents and evidence produced by the respective parties on record of the case.
5. The complainant, in the complaint and in the affidavit filed before the learned Trial Court, has stated that he had given the accused the amount of Rs.11,60,700/- somewhere in October, 2017, and the amount was given in the presence of his nephew Hirendrasinh Zala. The amount was given for a period of three months and after a period of three months when the accused did not return the amount, he demanded for the same from the accused and the cheque was given by the accused. During the cross-examination by the learned Page 8 of 22 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Tue Sep 10 2024 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 13 21:06:34 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/10355/2024 ORDER DATED: 20/08/2024 undefined advocate for the accused, the witness has stated that he was working as a wire man in Gujarat Agro Industries Corporation and has taken voluntary retirement, and at that time, he was the in-charge Divisional Manager. That he is aware that if any amount is paid, a receipt has to be taken, and he is not aware that any transaction more than Rs.20,000/- has to be done only by cheque and not by cash. If any receipt is not given, it cannot be said that the amount was paid and he has no document to prove in what year, in what month, and on what date, what amount was given to the accused. That he has not produced any document to show that besides the amount of cheque, he had given the accused any other amount and he does not have any receipt or any document to show that the accused was given an amount of Rs.11,60,700/- in cash. Demonetization had taken place in India on 08.11.2016 and currency notes of Rs.500/- and Rs.1000/- were demonetized. The currency notes were to be deposited in the bank within a period of three months, and there was a shortage of cash at that time. That he has no evidence to show from which bank the amount of Page 9 of 22 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Tue Sep 10 2024 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 13 21:06:34 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/10355/2024 ORDER DATED: 20/08/2024 undefined Rs.11,60,700 was withdrawn and the complainant has stated that he had the amount in cash. That in the complaint or in his affidavit on oath, he has not stated whether the amount was given by cash, cheque or draft and has not stated the place where the amount was given. That he has not produced any document to show that he had the amount with him in the bank in October, 2017. That his nephew Hirendrasinh Zala was accompanying him to the court on every adjournment.
6. The complainant has examined PW-2 Pankil Kalpeshbhai Parikh at Exh.43 and the witness is the Branch Manager, ICICI Bank, Chandlodiya Branch, Ahmedabad, who has produced the Customer Application Form filled up by the accused for opening the account with ICICI Bank, Chandlodiya Branch, Ahmedabad at Exh.44, the statement of Account No.182801502671 from 06.01.2014 to 23.06.2017 at Exh.45 and the Account Closure Application given by the accused on 28.03.2017 at Exh.46. The witness has identified Cheque No.018975 dated 12.02.2018 of Account Page 10 of 22 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Tue Sep 10 2024 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 13 21:06:34 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/10355/2024 ORDER DATED: 20/08/2024 undefined No.182801502671 of the accused, which is produced at Exh.17 and the Return Memo of Bank of India, which is produced at Exh.18, which states that the cheque was returned with the endorsement "Account Closed". 6.1. The complainant has examined PW-3 Sahil Nehalchand Gupta, Assistant Manager, Bank of India, Limbdi at Exh.60 and the witness has produced the statement of the complainant's Account No.313510110001037 from 24.01.2018 to 18.04.2018 at Exh.61, which shows that the cheque for Rs.11, 60,700/- was returned unpaid on 20.02.2018. 6.2. The complainant has examined PW-4 Mahammadbhai Ahmedbhai Mirza at Exh.68 and the witness is the advocate, who had given the statutory notice, under the instructions of the complainant, which is produced at Exh.19 to the accused. The witness has identified the notice produced at Exh.19, which was on his letter head with his signature and the envelope produced at Exh.20, which was received by him on 14.03.2018. During the cross-examination by the learned advocate for the accused, the witness has stated that in the Page 11 of 22 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Tue Sep 10 2024 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 13 21:06:34 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/10355/2024 ORDER DATED: 20/08/2024 undefined notice produced at Exh.19, the date, month or year when the complainant and the accused were introduced to each other is not mentioned and in the notice, it is not mentioned, in what month, year or date, the amount was given to the accused. The notice also does not state that the amount was given in cash and the notice does not mention the year month and date when the transaction took place. There is no stamp of the Post Office of Ahmedabad on the envelope produced at Exh.20 and the notice produced at Exh.20 was returned from the Post Office with the endorsement that the owner has refused to accept the same.
6.3. The complainant has examined PW-5 Radheshyambhai Haridasbhai Sadhu at Exh.72 and the witness is the Post Master, who has stated that he was working at the Sub Post Office Chuda for the last four months and was earlier working as a Clerk in Dhangadhra Sub Post Office. The envelope produced at Exh.20 was registered at the Sub Post Office as Letter No.RG384383469IM on 06.03.2018 at 12:54 hours, and the cover was sent by advocate M.A.Mirza to Page 12 of 22 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Tue Sep 10 2024 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 13 21:06:34 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/10355/2024 ORDER DATED: 20/08/2024 undefined Ashwinbhai Merubhai Rajput, Ahmedabad. The envelope has the endorsement "party has refused to accept", hence returned, and it was returned to Chuda Post Office on 14.03.2018. During the cross-examination by the learned advocate for the accused, the witness has stated that on the envelope at Exh. 20, the stamp of Chuda Post Office is not affixed and it is merely stated that the person to whom addressed has refused to accept the same.
7. In the further statement recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the accused has stated that he does not know the complainant and had not taken the amount of Rs.11,60,700/- from the complainant, but he had purchased Hyundai Grand-i10 Car Registration No. GJ-1-RL- 9431 from Hirendrasinh Zala by an agreement dated 05.11.2016. The accused has produced at Exh. 86 an application of Hirendrasinh Zala, residing at I-801, Agarwal Apartment, Anandnagar Cross Road, Satellite, Ahmedabad to Police Inspector, Anandnagar Police Station, Ahmedabad dated 31.12.2017 stating that the accused Ashwinbhai Page 13 of 22 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Tue Sep 10 2024 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 13 21:06:34 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/10355/2024 ORDER DATED: 20/08/2024 undefined Merubhai had purchased Hyundai Grand i10 Car registration No.GJ-1-RL-9431 on 15.11.2016 from him and a Notarized Agreement was executed and the remaining installments were to be paid by the accused. That the insurance had expired, but no insurance was taken, and he had gone to the house of the accused to inquire, and the car was not found, and on inquiry, he had stated that the car was with his brother at Bhavnagar, but he had not given the address of his brother to him. The accused has produced a letter of Police Sub Inspector, Anandnagar Police Station, Ahmedabad City to Police Inspector, Anandnagar Police Station, Ahmedabad City stating that Application No.LA/13/18 is required to be filed as the statement of Ashwinbhai Merubhai Rajput was recorded and as the agreement executed between them was breached, the applicant was explained to take resort of the Civil Court and the application is required to be filed. The agreement is produced at Exh.88 along with a copy of the R.C.Book and Aadhar Card of the complainant and the statement dated 04.01.2018 of the complainant is produced at Exh.89, The Page 14 of 22 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Tue Sep 10 2024 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 13 21:06:34 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/10355/2024 ORDER DATED: 20/08/2024 undefined statement of the accused is produced at Exh.90 and the letter of Probationary Police Sub Inspector, Chandkheda Police Station, Ahmedabad City written to Police Inspector, Chandkheda Police Station, Ahmedabad City is produced at Exh.91. The document states that the applicant had asked for blank cheques as security, and the accused had given two blank cheques of ICICI Bank Chandlodiya Branch, Ahmedabad City, which were misused by the applicant and a case was filed in the Court of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Limbdi. The accused has produced a letter dated 04.09.2018 of Police Inspector, Police Station to Police Inspector, Anandnagar Police Station and a notice dated 06.01.2018 sent by advocate Kanwaljitsinh D. Chauhan on behalf of his client, Hirendrasinh Zala to the accused Ashwinbhai Merubhai Rajput at Exh.93 and the reply given by advocate Gaurang B. Gohel, on behalf of his client, Ashwinbhai Merubhai Rajput to Hirendrasinh R. Zala is produced at Exh.94. The accused has also produced a letter of Hirendrasinh Zala written to Police Inspector Chandkheda Police Station at Exh.95.
Page 15 of 22 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Tue Sep 10 2024 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 13 21:06:34 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/10355/2024 ORDER DATED: 20/08/2024 undefined
8. On perusal of all these documents produced by the accused, it prima facie transpires that Hirendrasinh Zala, nephew of the complainant, had Hyundai i10 No.GJ-1-RL-9431 and agreement of sale was executed between the owner Hirendrasinh Zala and the accused for the said car on 05.11.2016 and as per the agreement, the car was sold for Rs.7,86,144/- out of which, an amount of Rs.1,30,000/- was given in cash and the amount of Rs.71,800/- was to be paid within one month. The remaining amount of Rs.5,85,144/- was to be paid in 72 installments of the amount of Rs.8127/- each in ADC Bank as the loan was outstanding, and the agreement was executed in the presence of the Notary. It appears that the accused did not take the insurance for the vehicle and there was a dispute between the parties and applications were made to Chandkheda Police Station and Anand Police Station regarding the transaction.
9. In the entire evidence of the complainant, there is no evidence regarding the date on which the huge amount of Rs.11,60,700/- was given to the accused and the manner in Page 16 of 22 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Tue Sep 10 2024 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 13 21:06:34 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/10355/2024 ORDER DATED: 20/08/2024 undefined which the amount was given i.e whether it was given by cash, by cheque or by draft and the place where the amount was given. The complainant has stated that the amount was given in the presence of his nephew, Hirendrasinh Zala, but the complainant has not examined his nephew, Hirendrasinh Zala as a witness before the learned Trial Court, even though it has come on record that Hirendrasinh Zala was accompanying the complainant on every date to the learned Trial Court. The complainant has stated that he retired as the in-charge Divisional Manager of Gujarat Agro Industries Corporation, but he has stated that he did not take any receipt for the huge amount of Rs.11,60,700/- that he had given to the accused somewhere in October, 2017. It is pertinent to note that the complainant was the in-charge Divisional Manager and an educated person, but he has not mentioned the date, on which, the amount was given and has not taken any receipt or any security at the time when the amount was given. The complainant has stated that it was only after a period of three months had lapsed when he had demanded the amount from the accused that the cheque Page 17 of 22 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Tue Sep 10 2024 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 13 21:06:34 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/10355/2024 ORDER DATED: 20/08/2024 undefined was given, but the complainant has not stated where was the cheque given. As per the record, the accused is residing at Chandkheda, Ahmedabad City and the complainant has given two addresses at village Sauka, Taluka Limbdi, District Surendranagar and presently residing at Alka Park Society, Vastrapur Railway Crossing Road, Jivraj Park, Ahmedabad, but the exact place where the amount was given or the place where the cheque was given is not mentioned in the complaint or in the examination-in- chief of the complainant. If the cheque is perused, it is admitted that the cheque bears only the signature of the accused and the handwriting on the body of the cheque does not belong to the accused. The complainant has produced the statutory notice at Exh.19 and the envelope at Exh.20 and the envelope at Exh.20 has been posted from Sub Post Office, Chuda on 06.03.2018 vide Register Letter No. RG 384383469 IN, but the envelope does not bear the stamp of any Post Office of Ahmedabad or the Post Office at Chuda. The envelope has been addressed to Ashwinbhai Mehrubha Rajput, residing at A-404, Shri Sharan Flat, Chandkheda, Tragad Road, Zundal, Page 18 of 22 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Tue Sep 10 2024 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 13 21:06:34 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/10355/2024 ORDER DATED: 20/08/2024 undefined Ahmedabad and has been sent by M.A.Mirza, advocate, Shipai Sheri, Chuda, District Surendranagar, but the envelope bears only the stamp of the registration with the bar code and handwriting of some person, which states that the address he has refused to accept and hence returned. That as there are no stamp of Sub Post Office, Chuda and any Post Office of Ahmedabad, it is not proved as to whether the notice was, in fact, posted from Chuda Police Station received at Ahmedabad Post Office and it was sent to be delivered to the house of the accused.
10. It is settled law that the Apex Court in various judgments while dealing with the powers of the appellate court in an appeal against an order of acquittal has laid down that the Appellate Court has full power to review, reconsider and re-appreciate the entire evidence, on which, the order of acquittal is passed. There are no restrictions or limitations on the exercise of the powers of an Appellate Court and the Appellate Court can reach its own conclusion on the facts and of law; however, the Appellate Court must bear in mind Page 19 of 22 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Tue Sep 10 2024 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 13 21:06:34 IST 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/10355/2024 ORDER DATED: 20/08/2024 undefined that in cases of acquittal, there is a double presumption in favour of the accused and one presumption is regarding the presumption of innocence, which is available to the accused under the Cardinal Principle of Criminal Jurisdiction that every person will be presumed to be innocent unless he is proved guilty by a Competent Court, and secondly when the accused has secured an order of acquittal in his favour, the presumption of innocence is further reinforced and strengthened by the learned Trial Court. That if the Court finds that on the basis of the evidence on record of the case, the findings of acquittal recorded by the learned Trial Court at reasonable and possible view, the Appellate Court should not disturb the findings. As far as cases under the Negotiable Instruments Act are concerned, the provision of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act can be booked if there is a legally enforceable debt or liability, which is proved by the complainant and the cheque must be issued in discharge of the whole or part of the legally enforceable liability. Page 20 of 22 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Tue Sep 10 2024 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 13 21:06:34 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/10355/2024 ORDER DATED: 20/08/2024 undefined
11. Having regard to the findings of the learned Trial Court and the accepted legal position of law in cases filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and also the settled positions in acquittal cases, this Court is of the considered view that the complainant has not proved that he had given the amount of Rs.11,60,700/- to the accused and the manner, in which, the amount was given, the date, month and year and the place, where the amount was given. The complainant has stated that the amount was given in the presence of his nephew Hirendrasinh Zala, but for reasons best known to the complainant, Hirendrasinh Zala has not been examined as a witness before the learned Trial Court, even though, it has come on record that he was regularly accompanying the complainant to the learned Trial Court. It is pertinent to note that the complainant has stated that he did not take any receipt or any document as a security when the huge amount of Rs.11,60,700/- was given to the complainant and only the signature on the cheque has been proved whereas the accused has raised the defence stating that the transaction for the Hyundai Grand i10 No.GJ-1-RL- Page 21 of 22 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Tue Sep 10 2024 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 13 21:06:34 IST 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/10355/2024 ORDER DATED: 20/08/2024 undefined 9431 was entered into with Hirendrasinh Zala, nephew of the complainant and there was a dispute between them and applications were filed before the Chandkheda Police Station and Anandnagar Police Station ann the cheque in question was given as a security to Hirendrasinh Zala and all those documents have been produced on record. Considering the documents produced on record, I am of the opinion that the learned Trial Court has appreciated all the evidence minutely and has not committed any error in arriving at the conclusion and therefore, this Court is not inclined to allow the present application for Leave to Appeal. Hence, the present application for Leave to Appeal stands disposed of as rejected.
(S. V. PINTO,J) F.S.KAZI.....
Page 22 of 22 Uploaded by F.S. KAZI(HC01075) on Tue Sep 10 2024 Downloaded on : Fri Sep 13 21:06:34 IST 2024