TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (8) TMI 695
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....38 of Negotiable Instruments Act. The appellant, in the application for leave to appeal submited that respondent Chanda Bansal has taken a loan of Rs.20,00,000/- for her personal need from appellant-Ramesh Chandra. To repay the loan, respondent had given a cheque dated 21.03.2016 in sum of Rs.20,00,000/- payable from her account in HDFC bank, Branch, Khari Phatak, Vidisha. The cheque was presented for encashment on 01.06.2016, but it was dishonoured on 02.06.2016. Despite service of demand notice t o respondent, she had not paid the amount of cheque, therefore, a complaint under Section 138 of NI Act was filed. Learned Judicial Magistrate, after trial, passed the impugned judgment on 21.07.2022 and acquitted respondent-Chanda Bansal. I t ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the learned trial Court. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that there was no commercial transaction between the respondent/accused Chanda Bansal with the complainant. Further, the complainant in his evidence could not clarify when and through what mode, he had given loan of Rs.20,00,000/- to accused Chanda Bansal. Thus, the factum of loan to the accused Chanda Bansal being doubtful, learned Trial Court committed no error in acquitting her. Heard both the parties. Perused the record. From study of judgments of Supreme Court on the question of scope of powers of the Court in an appeal against acquittal in the cases of Chandrappa Vs State of Karnataka, (2007) 4 SCC 415, Murugesan v. State through Inspector of Police, AIR ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nce on record, or if the Courts entire approach with respect to dealing with the evidence is found to be patently illegal, leading to the miscarriage of justice, or if its judgment is unreasonable and is based on an erroneous understanding of the law and of the facts of the case. (6) Subject to aforesaid, where the matter of the extent and depth of consideration of the appeal is concerned, no distinctions or differences in approach are envisaged in dealing with an appeal as such merely because one was against conviction or the other against an acquittal. (7) The appellate Court must bear in mind that the presumption of innocence in favour of the accused has been bolstered by an acquittal by the lower Court. In the backdrop of aforesaid....