2024 (8) TMI 80 - HC - Indian Laws

Acquittal upheld in dishonour case as accused successfully rebutted Section 139 presumption through witness testimony

Delhi HC dismissed leave petition against acquittal in dishonour of cheque case under NI Act. Trial court (MM) correctly found petitioner failed to ... Dishonour of Cheque - leave to appeal against the judgement of acquittal - rebuttal of presumption under Section 139 read with Section 118 NI Act - presumption of innocence - HELD THAT:- This Court finds no illegality or infirmity in the judgement passed by the learned MM. While the petitioner had failed to substantiate his contentions relating to the grant of Rs. 9,00,000/- as cash loan to the respondent and further the pro-note sought to be relied upon by the petitioner was also rightly found to be irrelevant, the respondent had duly rebutted the presumption raised against him. The respondent, while proving the factum of handing over of the subject cheques to Ramesh, had been able to prove its defence through the testimony of DW3-Khilor Chandra on ‘preponderance of probabilities’ and in the absence of the petitioner being able to provide any further evidence to substantiate his case, respondent No. 2’s acquittal is justified. The factum relating to the financial capacity of the petitioner, which weighed heavily upon the learned MM, also holds a crucial position in the acquittal of the respondent, since the same made the case of the petitioner highly improbable. Further, a decision of acquittal, strengthens the presumption of innocence in the favor of the accused. At the same time, the appellate court, while considering a leave to appeal, has a duty to satisfy itself if the view taken by the trial court is both possible and plausible. The appellate court should be slow in reversing an order of acquittal passed by the trial court. This Court finds no ground to grant leave to appeal - the leave petition is dismissed. Issues:1. Appeal against judgment of acquittal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881.2. Failure to establish the source of loan and shifting of burden of proof.3. Rebuttal of presumption under Section 139 NI Act by the accused.4. Legal position on presumption under Section 139 NI Act and its rebuttal.5. Consideration of facts and circumstances by the trial court in acquittal decision.6. Principles guiding appellate court in reversing orders of acquittal.Analysis:1. The petitioner sought leave to appeal against the judgment of acquittal under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881. The respondent had delayed repayment of a loan, leading to dishonored cheques and a legal complaint.2. The petitioner argued that the trial court erred in not considering the facts properly, including the source of the loan and burden of proof. The petitioner's income and lack of ITR documentation were questioned, along with the unsubstantiated claim that the cheques were handed over to a third party.3. The trial court noted that the accused successfully rebutted the presumption under Section 139 NI Act by presenting a defense that contradicted the petitioner's claims. The accused's defense included the involvement of a third party in handling the cheques.4. The legal position on presumption under Section 139 NI Act was reiterated, emphasizing the rebuttable nature of the presumption and the accused's burden to raise a probable defense. The accused's evidence and circumstances were considered in rebutting the presumption.5. The trial court's decision was upheld as it found no illegality in the judgment. The petitioner's failure to substantiate claims and the accused's successful rebuttal of the presumption led to the acquittal. The financial capacity of the petitioner was crucial in evaluating the case.6. The principles guiding appellate courts in reversing acquittal orders were discussed, emphasizing the need for a possible and plausible view by the trial court. The appellate court should be cautious in overturning acquittal decisions, considering the presumption of innocence and the trial court's findings.This detailed analysis covers the issues involved in the judgment, providing a comprehensive overview of the legal arguments, evidence, and reasoning considered in the decision.