KARTHIK Vs. P.RAMASWAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed by the complainant challenging the judgment of acquittal dtd. 18/10/2014 passed in C.C.No.146/2011 by the XIII A.C.M.M., Bengaluru, whereunder the respondent -accused has been acquitted for the offence punishable under Sec. 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as "N.I. Act" for brevity).

(2.) The brief facts of the appellant -complainant's case is that The respondent -accused came in contact of the appellant -complainant in connection with shooting and production of kannada film "Varshadhare". During the production of the said film, the respondent -accused requested to the appellant -complainant to invest Rs.12,50,000.00 for release of the said film and investment made by the complainant will be returned on or before 22/2/2010. The accused has under taken to execute an agreement towards repayment of the said loan amount. The complainant has paid Rs.12,50,000.00 to the respondent -accused. The respondent -accused in order to repay the said amount has issued cheque bearing No.464249 dtd. 28/2/2010 for Rs.12,50,000.00 drawn in ING Vysya Bank Ltd., Bengaluru. The complainant presented the said cheque and it came to be dishonoured with endorsement as "funds insufficient". The complainant got issued legal notice to the respondent -accused on 22/7/2010 through RPAD and UCP. Inspite of service of notice the respondent -accused neither replied nor repaid the cheque amount within stipulated time. Therefore, the appellant -complainant has filed private complaint against the respondent -accused for offence punishable under Sec. 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

(3.) Learned Magistrate took cognizance and registered case against the respondent -accused for offence punishable under Sec. 138 of N.I. Act in C.C.No.146/2011. The plea of the respondent -accused has been recorded. The complainant in order to prove his case has examined himself as P.W.1, got examined other two witnesses as P.W.2 and P.W.3 and got marked documents as Ex.P1 to P10. The statement of respondent -accused came to be recorded under Sec. 313 of Cr.P.C. The respondent -accused did not choose to lead defence evidence. Learned Magistrate after hearing on both sides has formulated points for consideration and passed impugned judgment of acquittal. The said judgment of acquittal has been challenged by the complainant in this appeal.