Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 489F

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 417(2-A)

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860) S. 489-F---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.417(2-A)---Dishonestly issuing a cheque---Appreciation of evidence---Appeal against acquittal---Accused was charged for issuing cheque amounting to Rs. forty lakhs to complainant in lieu of cash amount of complainant given to accused on profit basis, for agriculture business, which was dishonoured due to insufficient funds---Complainant admitted during his cross-examination that he did not obtain any receipt of the payment of Rs. 21,00,000/- to the accused---Complainant also admitted that he was an employee and not a businessman, and his salary was Rs. 50,000/= per month, with monthly savings up to Rs. 30,000/----However, complainant was unable to establish in evidence from where did he obtain such a huge amount---Complainant attempted to improve his case in evidence for the first time by claiming that two of his brothers had also invested in the principal amount---Complainant also produced an agreement dated 27-08-2020, allegedly made between him and accused after more than two years of handing over the alleged cash amount---However, such an agreement was completely silent about any agricultural business---Moreover, neither complainant nor his witnesses deposed any description of the agricultural business---Complainant claimed that the agreement was executed in presence of witnesses---On the contrary, one of the witnesses admitted in his evidence that he had no knowledge about the terms and conditions settled in between the complainant and the accused, nor any knowledge about any profit amount---Said witness also admitted that the alleged agreement was prepared by the complainant---Said witness also admitted that the handwriting on the subject cheque was of the complainant and not of the accused---Despite claiming to be the alleged co-investor of the principal amount and despite being the alleged marginal witness of the said agreement, said witness did not support the complainant's version, nor did he know anything about the terms and conditions of the alleged agreement---Sanctity, authenticity and existence of such belated agreement, therefore, became doubtful---Said witness…