ABDUL RAZAK Vs. SRI. ASHOK R. UPADHYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the appellant. The appellant was the complainant before the trial Court alleging the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as 'N.I. Act', for brevity). The complainant claims, he is the resident of Dharwad and having known the accused for twelve years, prior to the date of the complaint, and that, in February 2004, the respondent -accused had approached him for a loan, which was lent by the complainant and since there was no repayment on demand by the appellant, a cheque bearing No. 0160474, dated 01.04.2006, for a sum of Rs. 80,000/ - drawn on Malaprabha Grameena Bank was issued. When the same was presented for collection, it was returned dishonoured with an endorsement "funds insufficient", in the account of the respondent. It is thereafter, a notice required under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, was issued and on non -compliance of the demand, a complaint was registered and on service of summons, the respondent contested the proceedings. The trial Court had framed the following points for consideration:

(2.) THE trial Court had answered the same in the negative, and consequently, the respondent was acquitted. It is that which is under challenge in the present appeal.

(3.) THE respondent has been served and remained unrepresented.