S.L. SHIVANNA Vs. HARSHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant was the complainant (hereinafter referred as 'complainant') in C.C. No. 1487/2008 initiated against respondent (hereinafter referred as 'accused') for an offence punishable under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short, 'the Act'). The learned trial Judge had acquitted accused. Therefore, complainant is before this court. I have heard Smt. D. Harshini, learned counsel for complainant. The respondent though served is not represented.

(2.) THE averments of complaint and evidence adduced by complainant are stated thus: -

(3.) IN the judgment reported in : AIR 2010 SC 1898 (in the case of Rangappa vs. Mohan), the Supreme Court has held: -