` 2026:JHHC:26192 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Acquittal Appeal (C) No.12 of 2025 ---- Bharat Sahu, aged about 51 years, S/o Late Harinandan Sahu, resident of Village Mundo, P.O. Irgaon, P.S. Lohardaga, District Lohardaga, Jharkhand …. …. Appellant(s) -Versus- 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Premchand Sahu, aged about 60 years, S/o Late Baleshwar Sahu, resident of Village- Gumla Road, Rajabangla, P.O. Senha, P.S. Senha, District Lohardaga, Jharkhand …. …. Respondent(s) ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR ---- For the Appellant : Mr. Manoj Prasad, Adv. : Ms. Jyoti Kumari, Adv. For the State : Mr. Bhola Nath Ojha, A.P.P For the Respondent No.2 : Mr. Sumit Prakash, Adv. : Mr. Kumar Nitish, Adv. ---- 12/Dated: 31st August, 2026 1. Heard the parties. 2. The present acquittal appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 18.01.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Lohardaga in Criminal Appeal No.74 of 2023 whereby and whereunder the learned Appellate Court has set-aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 04.08.2023 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lohardaga by which the respondent No.2 has been convicted and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and he has also directed to pay Rs.3.00 Lac to the complainant as a compensation. 3. The present case has been listed today under the heading for order with defect, but the defect as pointed out by the office i.e. non-filing of leave to appeal is not required as the appellant is the victim himself. With the consent of the parties, the matter has been taken up today for hearing. 4. The dates are relevant for the present case which is also admitted by the parties which are as follows:- 2026:JHHC:26192 2 Acquittal Appeal (C) No.12 of 2025 (i) The date of return of cheque is 02.01.2019 by the Bank with a remark of unpaid with an endorsement “Payment Stopped by the Drawer”. (ii) The legal notice is dated 09.01.2019 which was sent by the speed post on 10.01.2019. 5. The statutory period presumes 30 days for service of the notice. As the track record has been produced which has not been disbelieved rightly as because it is an electronic evidence and the same has not been presented in terms of Section 65(B) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. 6. Thus, fifteen days for clearing the dues is available to the victim and only on expiry of 15 days, the cause of action arisen for filing of the Complainant Case. This issue has already been settled by the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Yogendra Pratap Singh vrs. Savitri Pandey & Another reported in (2014) 10 SCC 713. 7. In the above judgment, the Hon’ble Apex Court has clearly indicated that in case of delay in filing of the complaint, the parties are at liberty to take benefit under the proviso to clause (b) of Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. 8. In that view of the matter, this Court finds no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment of the appellate Court. 9. With the aforesaid liberty to the appellant, the present acquittal appeal is hereby, disposed of. (Rajesh Kumar, J.) Dated: 31st August, 2026 Raja/- Uploaded on 02.09.2026