Court dismisses appeal, finds applicant cheated respondent, fabricated documents, faces potential criminal charges.

The court dismissed the application seeking leave to appeal, ruling in favor of the respondent. The court found that the applicant had cheated the respondent, misused a cheque, and fabricated documents, leading to a breach of trust. The judgment highlighted the applicant's malafide practices, resulting in a demotion by LIC. The court ordered the applicant to pay costs to the respondent and allowed the respondent to seek withdrawal of the amount. Additionally, the judgment emphasized the potential for criminal proceedings against the applicant for forgery and fabrication of documents, urging LIC to suspend agents engaged in such practices.

---

---

Issues:
Application seeking leave to appeal challenging the judgment and order acquitting the respondent for the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.

Analysis:
The case involved the applicant, an LIC Agent, and respondent no.1, who issued a cheque to the applicant for a Life Insurance policy but later claimed it was for personal medical expenses. The cheque was dishonored, leading to a legal dispute. The applicant alleged that the respondent misused a blank cheque issued for the insurance policy, leading to criminal proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

The applicant's evidence included details of multiple cash transactions and loans given to the respondent, totaling Rs. 1,90,000, with a demand for Rs. 2,40,000. The respondent countered by claiming the cheque was for the policy, subject to finalization after consulting family members. The respondent also accused the applicant of forgery and fabrication of documents, leading to an ordeal of a ten-year trial.

Witness testimonies, including that of Rameshkumar Jaiswar, who filed a complaint against the applicant, and Sonali Patwa, a LIC Manager, were presented. The court noted discrepancies in the applicant's evidence, including variations in loan amounts and ATM withdrawals in different locations on the same day. The court found in favor of the respondent, concluding that the applicant had cheated the respondent, misused the cheque, and fabricated documents.

The judgment highlighted the breach of trust by the applicant, affecting the relationship between LIC and its insured. The court criticized the applicant's malafide practices, leading to the demotion by LIC. The court dismissed the application seeking leave to appeal, ordering the applicant to pay costs to the respondent and allowing the respondent to seek withdrawal of the amount. The judgment emphasized the potential for criminal proceedings against the applicant for forgery and fabrication of documents, urging LIC to suspend agents engaged in such practices.

---