2026:JHHC:18478 1 Acquittal Appeal (C) No. 05 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Acquittal Appeal (C) No. 05 of 2025 Basanti Devi aged about 54 years wife of Chhatu Yadav, resident of Budmu, P.O. and P.S. Budmu, District- Ranchi …....... Appellant(s) Vrs. 1.The State of Jharkhand 2.Santosh Kumar Sahu, son of Ram Awtar Sahu, resident of Budmu, P.O. and P.S. Budmu, District Ranchi ........ Respondent(s) ….... CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Navin Kr. Singh, Advocate Mrs. Nivedita Kundu, Advocate For the State : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, P.P. For the Resp. No. 2 : Mr. Awanish Shankar, Advocate 08/24.06.2026 Heard the parties. 2. The present acquittal appeal has been filed against the judgment of acquittal dated 24.01.2024 passed by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner No. VII, Ranchi, in Cr. Appeal No. 114 of 2023 (T.R No.48 of 2023), arising out of Complaint Case No.4873 of 2020, whereby and whereunder the Appellate Court has acquitted the respondent No.2 for the charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and set aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 31.05.2023 passed in the said Complaint Case No. 4873 of 2020 by the court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class- XXVIII, Ranchi convicting the respondent no.2 for the offence under Sections 138 of the N.I. Act and has sentencing him to undergo simple imprisonment for one year along with to pay compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- to the complainant and in default thereof, he has been sentenced to undergo six months simple imprisonment. 3. The criminal law has put into motion by filing a complaint case being Complaint Case No.4873 of 2020 against the accused for the offence under Section 138 of the N.I Act, 1881. 4. The brief facts of the case is that respondent no.2 had taken friendly loan of Rs. 3,80,000 from the complainant- appellant herein, for the purpose of business. To repay the loan amount he issued a cheque no. 017687 dated 10.06.2020 of Rs. 1,25,000 of Bank of India, Burmu Branch, Ranchi, Jharkhand in favour of the complainant. The 2026:JHHC:18478 2 Acquittal Appeal (C) No. 05 of 2025 complainant presented the cheque for encashment which was returned unpaid on 16.06.2020 due to “Cheque not in order”. Hence on 04.07.2020 the complainant sent legal notice but the accused refused to pay the cheque amount and hence the complaint case was filed 5. To substantiate the complainant’s story, altogether two witnesses have been examined by the learned trial court. C.W.1 Basanti Devi is the Complainant. She deposed that in her testimony that both parties are neighbors and she has given friendly loan several times to the accused and the same were returned by the accused. In the present case also, she has given friendly loan of Rs. 3,80,000/- to the accused but he had not returned the same. She has further deposed that the cheque given by the accused bearing cheque no. 017687 dated 10.06.2020 of amount Rs. 1,25,000/- was returned by the bank marked as “cheque not in order. Thereafter, she has given legal notice to the accused. C.W.2 Bindiya Devi has also supported the case of the complainant/victim. 6. Apart from oral evidence, the following documentary evidence have been adduced by the complainant. i. Exhibit-1 is the Cheque No.017687 dated 10.06.2020 of Bank of India for cheque amount of Rs.1,25,000 ii. Exhibit-2 is the cheque return memo dated 16.06.2020 iii. Exhibit-3 is the Legal notice dated 04.07.2020 iv. Exhibit-4 is the postal receipt dated 04.07.2020 v. Exhibit-5 is the Track Report dated 15.07.2020. 7. On culmination of the trial, the learned Trial Court convicted and sentenced the accused – respondent no. 2 as aforesaid. 8. Being aggrieved with the judgment of conviction, the accused has preferred an appeal being Criminal Appeal No.114 of 2023 before the Appellate Court and the learned Appellate Court has passed the judgment of acquittal only on the ground that there is a manipulation in the cheque, while the said cheque was presented for encashment before the Bank and as such, it is hit by Section 87 of the 2026:JHHC:18478 3 Acquittal Appeal (C) No. 05 of 2025 N.I. Act. 9. Learned counsel for the appellant has drawn attention to this Court to the discrepancy in the impugned judgment dated 24.01.2024 rendered by the appellate Court in Criminal Appeal No. 114 of 2023 wherein at paragraph No.8 in the Exhibit no.1 cheque number has been noted as Cheque No.017678 dated 10.12.2019, while it should be Cheque No.017687 dated 10.06.2020. Further, the other exhibits mentioned at para no. 8 of the judgments also seems to be different from the original one taken note by the trial court. Learned counsel has submitted that since there is a material defect in the judgment and as such, the order passed by the Appellate Court is bad in law. 10. Learned counsel for the State has drawn my attention to Ext.-1 which clearly suggests that the cheque in question has been interpolated and Rs. One Lakh has been added and it also does not bear any signature. Thus, merely on the ground that a cheque number has been wrongly noted in the impugned judgment, the same cannot be a ground for interference in the judgment of acquittal. 11. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and from perusal of the impugned cheque, it is quite clear that there is manipulation of the said cheque and that has not been signed by the drawer. Thus, the cheque in question seems to be an interpolated cheque and hit by Section 87 of the N.I Act. The scanned copy of the cheque in question is reproduced hereunder: 2026:JHHC:18478 4 Acquittal Appeal (C) No. 05 of 2025 12. Accordingly, this Court finds no reason to interfere with the judgment of acquittal dated 24.01.2024 passed by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner No. VII, Ranchi in Cr. Appeal No. 114 of 2023 (T.R No.48 of 2023), arising out of Complaint Case No.4873 of 2020. 13. Consequent thereof, the present acquittal appeal is hereby, dismissed. (Rajesh Kumar, J.) 24.06.2026 A. Mohanty Uploaded ____/____/2026