Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

23. During the course of examination Accused has produced bank statements, and copies of complaints before the various police stations. In the cross-examination he stated that, during the period 2003 to 2020 he residing No.17 and 18, 2nd Floor, 2nd Cross, N.K. Palya, Shivajinagar, Bengaluru. The same house is belongs to Mr. Sridhar. In he cross-examination he stated that he having Rs.20 lakhs financial transaction with Mr.Sridhar. He denied that he not having any financial transaction with Mr. Sridhar He further stated that at the time of vacating the house in the year 2020 he settled all amount to Mr. Sridhar. It is pertaining to note that, during the course of cross-examination the Accused arguing with the learned counsel for Complainant and not ready to heading the warning of the court. In further cross-examination he admits that after vacating the house of Mr. Sridhar, there is no any financial and business transaction with Mr. Sridhar. He further stated that after availing Rs.20 lakhs from Mr. Sridhar, the Accused issued 14 cheques to Mr.Sridhar, which belongs to Corporation Bank, HDFC Bank and Oriental Bank, but he unable to say the cheque numbers. Further he stated that after settling the amount in the year 2020 Mr. Sridhar not returned 14 cheques, therefore, he lodged the complaint against Mr. Sridhar before Shivajinagar police station as per Ex.D6. In the cross- examination he stated that, he issued notice to Mr. Sridhar as per Ex.D5, but he unable to produce postal receipt and acknowledgement with respect of Ex.D5. He denied that he was not sent Ex.D5 to Mr.Sridhar. In the cross-examination he admits that, Ex.D1 letter was given by him to the bank for destroy of cheque number No.912014 to 912020. Further he stated that the bankers were not destroyed the cheques in his presence. He further stated that he only given a letter to the bank. He further he stated that destroy means lost. In the cross-examination he further stated that if the banker were destroyed the cheque as per the letter Ex.D1, Ex.P1 cheque was not before the court through the Complainant. During the course of cross-examination when the learned counsel for Complainant asked to the Accused what happen with the complaint filed by him before Shivajinagar police then the witness answered that, police have not taken any action on his complaint. Further, when the learned counsel for Complainant asked for what action taken by him for not taking action by the police, then witness answered that, therefore, he came to the court. Further the learned counsel for Complainant asked to the Accused for private complaint before the court, then the Accused answered that, all are colluding with the police. The said cross-examination portion is as under;

25. Considering the oral and documentary evidence, the cheque belongs to Accused is not disputed and also signature on the cheque is also not disputed. The only contention of the Accused is that, he was issued Ex.P1 cheque along with other cheques to one Mr.Sridhar and Mr.Sridhar colluding with Complainant and other persons, have misusing the cheques and filed false complaints against him. On the other hand, the contention of the Complainant is that, except Mr.Sridhar, all are common friends and for the urgent financial needs, the Accused borrowed loan from them and for return of the said loan, he issued disputed cheques. Ex.D5 produced by the Accused which is the copy of notice issued by the Accused to Mr.Sridhar all the cheques numbers and bank names are mentioned. Ex.P1 cheque also one of the number mentioned in Ex.D5. As per Ex.D5 it was issued on 22.3.2021. Ex.P1 cheque date is 22.3.2021. May be before presentation of cheque date the Accused has issued the Ex.P1 either to Mr.Sridhar or the Complainant. As per Accused defence, he was vacated the premises in the year 2020 and he issued 14 cheques prior to vacate the premises. The allegations of the Accused in his defence evidence that, after vacating and locking the 4 th floor, Mr.Sridhar break open the lock of the 4 th Floor and taken possession belongs to him belongs along with documents and cheques. Further, he lodged complaint against Mr.Sridhar for break open the 4th floor house and taken possession belongings to him. As per Ex.D6 copy of complaint against Mr.Sridhar lodged on 9.3.2022. Therefore the allegations and documents are not corroborate each other. Further, Ex.D1 is letter to Punjab National Bank submitted on 30.1.2021 for destroying the remaining cheque No.912014 to 912020 which received by the banker on the same day, but he has not produced any action on Ex.D1 by the bank. The said letter was prior before presentation of Ex.P1 cheque. If the cheque was destroyed by the banker as per Ex.D1 the endorsement of the bank is "funds insufficient". If, Ex.P1 cheque was destroyed by the bank, the bank may issued endorsement that, the Ex.P1 cheque was destroyed. Therefore, it appears that, Accused intentionally created the documents to cheat the Complainant and others.