BASANTI DEVI vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

2026:JHHC:18478
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
st
No. 4873 of 2020 by the court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1 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
1 Acquittal Appeal (C) No. 05 of 2025

2026:JHHC:18478
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
2 Acquittal Appeal (C) No. 05 of 2025

2026:JHHC:18478
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:


3 Acquittal Appeal (C) No. 05 of 2025

2026:JHHC:18478

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
4 Acquittal Appeal (C) No. 05 of 2025