KANTHA RAJ Vs. SHAM SHUDIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a complainant's appeal preferred against the order passed by the trial Court acquitting the accusedrespondent of an offence punishable under Sec. 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act (herein after referred as N.I. Act).

(2.) Heard the learned counsel appearing for both the parties and perused the material on record.

(3.) It is the case of the complainant that, accused is well-known to him and in the last week of the September 2015, he approached him seeking financial assistance to improve his business and at his request, a sum of Rs.10,00,000.00 was paid as hand loan with a promise by the accused that the said amount will be repaid within one month. When the complainant approached the accused after one month and requested him to return the amount, in discharge of his liability, the accused issued a cheque bearing 008650 dtd. 25/10/2015 drawn on State Bank of Patiala, Meenakshi Towers, 1/43/2 Singasandra, Hosur Main Road Branch, Bengaluru. When the said cheque was presented to his bankers, Andhra Bank, Electronic City Branch, Bengaluru on 4/11/2015, the same was returned with an endorsement 'Account Closed' on 13/11/2015. Legal notice dtd. 23/11/2015 was issued by way of RPAD calling upon the accused to repay the amount and the same was served on 26/11/2015. However, instead of repaying the amount, the accused sent untenable reply and failed to make payment within the statutory period. Hence, committed an offence under Sec. 138 of N.I. Act.