KUMAR Vs. BHIMAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed by the appellant-complainant being aggrieved by the order passed by the JMFC, Mudhol, in C.C.No.11/2013 dated 28.01.2015.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that appellant lodged a private complaint against the respondent for the alleged offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act in a Private Complaint No.295/2011 on the file of JMFC, Mudhol, contending that in the year 2006, as the respondent was in need of money for his domestic constraints, he borrowed a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- from the complainant-appellant on 15.11.2006 and assured to pay back the amount whenever demanded by the appellant, and respondent has executed on demand promissory note in the presence of elders and the witnesses. When the complainant demanded for return of the amount the respondent started postponing on one or the other pretext and finally he issued a cheque for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- on 30.11.2011 drawn on State Bank of India, Mudhol Branch and when it was presented for encashment, same was dishonoured. Hence, said complaint was filed. But looking to the order sheet, it shows that when the matter was posted for evidence, the complainant remained absent and for that reason the complaint came to be dismissed and accused was ordered to be acquitted from the proceedings, which order is challenged in this appeal.

(3.) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant-complainant and also the learned counsel appearing for the respondent-accused.