ISHWAR RAMA GUNAGA Vs. RAMDAS ANANT PRABHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant-complainant is aggrieved by the order of the learned judicial Magistrate First Class, Kumta, dated 25-4-2001, in C. C. No. 1928 of 1996, by which, the respondent-accused has been acquitted of an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 ('act' for short ).

(2.) THE appellant-complainant presented, on 31-10-1994 to the Bank for encashment, a cheque allegedly issued by the respondent in his favour for a sum of Rs. 35,000/ -. On 3-11-1994, the appellant-complainant received intimation regarding its dishonour. On 14-11-1994, he issued notice to the respondent-accused demanding payment of the amount. The said notice was served on the respondent-accused on 2-12-1994. The appellant-complainant filed a complaint under Section 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code on 12-12-1994. The learned Magistrate took cognizance on the same day, i. e. , on 12-12-1994, recorded the sworn statement, found sufficient ground to proceed, and directed issuing of process for the offence under Section 138 of the Act, in answer to which, the respondent appeared and, after recording of the plea, both went to trial, and it is thereafter that the respondent-accused has come to be acquitted by the impugned judgment and order, mainly on the ground that the complaint was premature.

(3.) EVEN after hearing Sri Jalisatgi, the learned Counsel for the complainant-appellant at length, I am of the opinion that, the complaint was in fact a premature one, and as such, there was no alternative for the learned Magistrate at that stage, but, to acquit the accused.